May 10, 2025
Legalpedia Citation: (2014-05) Legalpedia (SC) 06825 In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Fri May 30, 2014 Suit Number: SC.343/2007 CORAM SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT SULEIMAN GALADIMA, […]
CORAM
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
WALTER SAMUEL NKANII ONNOGHEN, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
TIRIMISIYU ADEBAYO APPELLANTS
THE STATE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellant (now Deceased) and three others were charged at the trial court, tried, convicted and sentenced to death by hanging on a two count charge of conspiracy and armed robbery punishable under section 5(b) of the Robbery and Firearm (Special Provisions) Act and section 1 (2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act. Dissatisfied, the convicts including the Appellant herein, appealed jointly to the Court of Appeal, which dismissed same for lacking in merit. The Appellant still not satisfied with the decision of the Court below, appealed to the Supreme Court.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
1. Whether the lower court committed an error and the error occasioned a serious miscarriage of justice when it held that the identity of the appellant as one of the robbers was not raised as an issue before the trial court and could not therefore be raised before them without leave – Ground one.Whether on the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and the confessional statements of the appellant and his co-accused, the lower court was in error in not discharging and acquitting the appellant for the offences of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and armed robbery (Grounds 2, 3 and 4)?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
IDENTIFICATION PARADE- AN IDENTIFICATION PARADE BECOMES USEFUL WHENEVER THERE IS DOUBT AS TO IDENTITY OF THE SUSPECT
“It is also settled law that an identification parade is very essential and useful whenever there is doubt as to the ability of a victim to recognise the suspect who participated in carrying out the crime or where the identity of the said suspect or accused person is in dispute. However, where there is certainty or no dispute as to the identity of the perpetrator of a crime, there will be no need for an identification parade to further identify the offender.” PER ARIWOOLA JSC
CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT- FREE AND VOLUNTARY CONFESSION WILL GROUND A CONVICTION WITHOUT CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE
“Free and voluntary confessional statements will ground a conviction even without any corroborative evidence.” PER GALADIMA JSC
ALIBI- PLEA OF ALIBI SHOULD BE MADE AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY
“The plea of alibi should have been made at the earliest opportunity with due particulars during investigations by the police to enable same to be investigated and ascertain its veracity or otherwise.” PER FABIYI JSC
IDENTIFICATION PARADE – WHEN IS AN IDENTIFICATION PARADE NECESSARY
“It is trite law that an identification parade is not a sine qua non for identification in all cases where there has been a fleeting encounter with the victim of a crime, if there is yet other pieces of evidence leading conclusively to the identity of the perpetrator of the offence. An identification parade only becomes necessary where the victim of the crime did not know the accused before his acquaintance with him during the commission of the offence.” PER ARIWOOLA JSC
ALIBI-MEANING OF ALIBI
“Alibi means when a person charged with an offence says that he was not at the scene of crime at the time the alleged offence was committed. That he was indeed somewhere else and therefore he was not the person who committed the offence”. PER ARIWOOLA JSC
ARMED ROBBERY- WHAT THE PROSECUTION MUST ESTABLISH TO EARN A CONVICTION FOR THE OFFENCE OF ARMED ROBBERY
“The law is clear that for the prosecution to establish and earn conviction for the offence of armed robbery, it will be required to prove the following –
(i) That there was infact robbery;
(ii) That the robbery was an armed robbery; and
(iii) That the accused person was the armed robber.” PER ARIWOOLA JSC
CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – WAYS AN ACCUSED PERSON CAN IMPEACH HIS CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT
“Generally, during trial, an accused person who desires to impeach his statement is duty bound to establish that his earlier confessional statement cannot be true or correct by showing any of the following:-
(i) That he did not in fact make any such statement as presented; or
(ii) That he was not correctly recorded; or
(iii) That he was unsettled in mind at the time he made the Statement, or
(iv) That he was induced to make the statement.” PER ARIWOOLA JSC
ALIBI -DUTY OF THE PROSECUTION TO INVESTIGATE THE ISSUE OF ALIBI WHERE RAISED BY AN ACCUSED PERSON
“The law is trite that if an accused person raises unequivocally the issue of alibi, that he was somewhere else other than the locus delicti at the time of the commission of the offence with which he is charged and gives some facts and circumstances of his where about, the prosecution is duty bound to investigate the alibi set up, to verify its truthfulness or otherwise.” PER ARIWOOLA JSC
CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT- FREE AND VOLUNTARY CONFESSION OF GUILT IS SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A CONVICTION WITHOUT ANY CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE
“The law is settled, that a free and voluntary confession of guilt made by an accused person, if it is direct and positive is sufficient to warrant his conviction without any corroborative evidence as long as the court is satisfied of the truth of the confession.” PER ARIWOOLA JSC
CASES CITED
Akpan vs state (2001) 11 SCM 66; (2001) 15 NWLR (PT 737) 745; (2001) 7 SC (PT 1) 124;Alabi Vs. State (19930 7 NWLR (Pt 307) 551;Bello v. Police (1956) SCNLR 113Bozin Vs. The State (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt 8) 465 at 467Dare Jimoh vs The State (2014) LPELR 22464Folorunsho Kazeem Vs The State (2009) 29 WRN 43 at 68-69,Gachi v. The State (1973) 1 NMLR 331Hassan Vs. State (2001) 11 SCM 100; (2001) 35 WRN 175; (2001) 15 NWLR (Pt.735) 184.Jimoh Yesufu Vs The State (2000) 10 WRN 1 at 14.Ikemson vs. State (1989) 1 CLRN 1.R vs. lumbui (1976) 3 Ali ER 549; or (1977) QB 224 at 228 – 231; (2007) 17 NWLR (Ptl062) 31 at 69Nwachukwu Vs. The State (2007) 12 SCM (Pt.2) 447;Odu & Am v. The State (2001) 5 SCNJ 115 at 120; (2001) 10 NWLR (Pt. 772) 668.Okosi vs. The State (1989) 1 CLRN 29;Olayinka Vs. State (2007) 4 SC (Pt 1) 201; (2007) 9 NWLR (Pt 1040) 561; (2007) 8 SCM 193Onuoha vs The state (1987) 4 NWLR (PT 65) 331
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act 1990