GABRIEL ADAOJU WILCOX VS THE QUEEN
September 8, 2025MERCHANTS BANK LTD VS FEDERAL MINISTER OF FINANCE
September 8, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2022-02) Legalpedia 24060 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden at Lagos
Mon Oct 30, 1961
Suit Number: SC. 356/1961
CORAM
DE LESTANG, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
BRETT, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
TAYLOR, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
APPELLANTS
CHRISTOPHER ONYEDIRE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CRIMINAL LAW – ADJOURNMENT-TRIAL- EVIDENCE
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant, who ran into the bush immediately after, was seen by two witnesses hitting the deceased with a gun. During trial, he applied for adjournment to call a witness after he had given evidence to support a defence of alibi and insanity.
HELD
The court held that the application was rightly refused by the trial judge and that there was sufficient evidence which justified the conviction.
ISSUES
Whether the trial judge refusal to grant adjournment prejudiced the appellant.
Whether the appellant was rightly convicted.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CHRISTOPHER ONYEDIRE
‘it is not within the province of the trial Judge in determining whether or not he should allow witnesses to be summoned on behalf of the accused, to take into consideration the probability of the witness being able to give material evidence.’ Per Taylor F.J
CASES CITED
Rex v. Modem and Inyang, 12 W.A.C.A. 224
Shorunke v. the King (1946) A.C. 316
STATUTES REFERRED TO
The Criminal Procedure Code
