Legalpedia Citation: (2023-04) Legalpedia 16943 (CA)

In the Court of Appeal

SOKOTO JUDICIAL DIVISION

Fri Apr 14, 2023

Suit Number: CA/S/129C/2022

CORAM

MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU JCA

ABUBAKAR MAHMUD TALBA JCA

MOHAMMED DANJUMA JCA

PARTIES

SAIDU ISIYAKU TSOHO

APPELLANTS

THE STATE

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

APPEAL, CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE

 

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Accused (Appellant) was charged with committing culpable homicide. He was accused of killing his mother in-law in 2009 and fleeing before giving himself up to the police in 2016. The claim was that he used a matchet to carry out the act and this was premeditated because they were already having issues between them. he was also said to have injured his father in-law in the process.

At the end of the trial and in a considered judgment, the learned trial Judge of the High Court of Kebbi State, sitting at Birnin Kebbi found the appellant guilty for the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death and sentenced him to death by hanging while at the same time suspending the remaining three counts of charge.

Appellant was dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower Court and thereafter appealed to this court.

HELD

Appeal dismissed

ISSUES

Ø Whether the learned trial Judge was not wrong in convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence of culpable homicide when the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses did not prove the offence of culpable homicide beyond reasonable doubt to justify his conviction and sentence?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CULPABLE HOMICIDE – INGREDIENTS OF THE OFFENSE OF CULPABLE HOMICIDE

It is beyond any doubt that the burden of proof in criminal cases is upon the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused person beyond reasonable doubt.

 

Also in order to secure the conviction of an accused person for culpable homicide punishable with death under Section 221 (b) of the Penal Code, the prosecution has the duty of proving beyond reasonable doubt that:

(a) the deceased died,

(b) the death of the deceased was caused by the accused person,

(c) the act of the accused person which caused the death was done with intention of causing death, or the accused person knew or had reason to know that death would be the probable and not only a likely consequence of the act or any bodily injury which the act was intended to cause.

It was held in plethora of judicial authorities that all the three ingredients as stated above must co-exist for a case of culpable homicide punishable with death or murder as the case may be, to be made out. See UWAGBOE VS STATE (2008) 12 NWLR (PT. 1102) 621, EDOHO VS STATE (2010) 14 NWLR (PT. 1214) 65, IGABELE VS STATE (2006) 6 NWLR (PT.975) 100 and OMAH VS STATE (2021) 18 NWLR (PT.1807) 1 @ 21. – Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

HEARSAY – MEANING OF HEARSAY

Hearsay is testimony that is given by witness who relates not what he or she knows personally, but what others have said, it is therefore dependant on the credibility of someone other than the witness. Thus, where the evidence seeks to establish the truth of what was told by another person is hearsay and inadmissible. But where the evidence seeks to establish only the fact that a statement was made that evidence will not be taken as hearsay. See ITODO VS STATE (2020) 1 NWLR (PT. 1704) 1 @ 257. – Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

EVIDENCE – EVIDENCE OF AN INVESTIGATING POLICE OFFICER

First of all, the evidence of the investigating police officer can never be taken as hearsay because it is the report of what he saw or discovered in the course of his investigation. Therefore, the evidence of PW1 in the instant case are not hearsay. See ISAH VS STATE (2019) LPELR-49363 (CA). – Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

MEDICAL REPORTS – CONDUCT OF THE COURT TOWARDS SIGNED MEDICAL REPORTS

In POSU & ANOR VS THE STATE (2011) 1 SC 192, it was held that Court should presume the genuiness of any signature on a certificate in the absence of evidence to the contrary. And that Section 249 of the Criminal Procedure Code has extended the position of Section 55 (1) of the Evidence Act to all written reports by the medical or registered medical practitioner of the examination carried out on a person for the purpose of proving the nature of injury suffered or received by that person. – Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

 

ACTIONS – HOW ACTIONS ARE CONSTRUED

A man is presumed to intend the natural outcome of his act. – Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

 

PROVOCATION – ELEMENTS FOR PROVOCATION TO CONSTITUTE A DEFENSE

In KOLADE VS STATE (2017) LPELR – 42362 (SC) the apex Court has held that for provocation to constitute a defence for murder, it must consist of three elements which must co-exist namely; (a) that the act of provocation was done in the heat of passion, (b) that the loss of self-control was both actual and reasonable, that is to say, the act was done before there was time for cooling down, (c) that the retaliation is proportionate to the provocation. – Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

1. Penal Code
2. Evidence Act
3. Criminal Procedure Code

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT