CLARKE EJUREN VS COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
September 3, 2025EDEM AKPAN EKPO & ANOR VS THE STATE
September 3, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1964-11) Legalpedia 37840 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden At Abuja
Fri Nov 27, 1964
Suit Number: SC 430/1964
CORAM
BRETT JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BAIRAMIAN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
COKER JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
SUNDAY OMEGA
APPELLANTS
THE STATE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CRIMINAL LAW-ROBBERY-BRIGANDAGE-ALIBI-ADJOURNMENT
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant was convicted at the trial court of the offences of robbery and brigandage and has appealed against the conviction
HELD
The court held that no miscarriage of justice was occasioned by the refusal of the trial judge to adjourn the hearing of the case and accordingly dismissed the appeal
ISSUES
Whether the evidence of the 10th prosecution witness was reliable
Whether the identification parade was properly conducted
Whether the appellant had adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence
RATIONES DECIDENDI
ON RIGHT OF ACCUSED PERSON TO RESERVE HIS DEFENCE
‘An accused person is undoubtedly entitled to reserve his defence until the appropriate stage of his trial, but if he intends to call witnesses he must take timely steps to have them at his trial ready to give evidence at that stage-which means that he must summon them in advance, and that he cannot complain if, seeing that he has not summoned them, the trial court refuses to grant him an adjournment for the purpose of summoning witnesses when he is called upon for his defence. COKER, J.S.C
WHEN REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT MAY BE REFUSED
‘We cannot subscribe to the view that a Court of trial should adjourn the hearing at the instance of any party (be it the accused or the prosecution) when it is manifest that the application for such adjournment was made only for the purpose of delaying the proceedings, and a fortiori, when, as in this case, it was being made after a total inadvertence to the directions of a Court, a compliance with which would probably have obviated the necessity for any such application’.
COKER, J.S.C
CASES CITED
” (1) Danjuma Dan Buhari Rimin Auzinawa v. Kano Native Authority (1956) 1 FS.C.27
” Jalo Guri and Another v. Hadeiia Native Authority (1959) 4 F.S.C. 44
” Dixon Gokpa v. Inspector-General of Police [1961] All N.L.R. 423
” Thomas Sorunke v. The King (1946) A.C. 316
STATUTES REFERRED TO
” Criminal Procedure Code Law 1960
” Constitution of Nigeria
