CORAM
SOWEMIMO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MADARIKAN, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
IDIGBE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
ONU OKAFOR APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant was tried on the charges preferred against him by the respondent. The respondent applied for a retrial on the ground that, the information was preferred without jurisdiction.
HELD
The court held that the information must be quashed, notwithstanding the failure by the defense to have taken an objection on the information in the lower court.
ISSUES
Whether a retrial will be ordered where an objection to quash an information was not raised at the lower court.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
RE-TRIAL- WHEN WILL BE ORDERED
A re-trial will not be ordered merely because, if so ordered, the prosecution will have the opportunity of remedying a defect in their case in order to secure a conviction. The court will not grant a new trial (retrial) upon trial which is null and void. PER IDIBGE JSC
CASES CITED
R V. CHAPEL BOLINGBROKE 17 COX 455
R V. THOMPSON (1914) K.B 99
ABODUNDU & ORS V. THE QUEEN
R V. HEARSE 4 B & S 947 (1959) 4 FSC 70
R V NISBET (1972) 1 Q.B 37
AKWA V. THE STATE (1969) 1 ALL NLR 133
R V JAMES 12 COX 127
MOSES OKORO V. THE POLICE (1953) 14 WACA
STATUTES REFERRED TO
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW (CAP 31, VOL.2)
LAWS OF THE EASTERN REGION 1974
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISION) ED