Can a Conviction for Culpable Homicide be Secured in the Absence of the Body of the Deceased?

CASE TITLE: LAWAL v. STATE (2025) LPELR-80000(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 10TH JANUARY, 2025
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: MUSLIM SULE HASSAN, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on Criminal Law and Procedure.

FACTS:
This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court of Justice of Katsina State, sitting at Katsina, delivered by his Lordship Honorable Justice A.K. Tukur on the 6th of August, 2022.

A brief fact of the case according to PW1 was that the appellant had accused the deceased of stealing his phone, and PW1 advised that they should settle the issue in the morning or report to the nearby police station. The appellant picked a stick and hit the deceased on the head, and he fell down. The deceased was rushed to the hospital, but he later died. The appellant was charged alone before the trial High Court for the offence of Culpable Homicide punishable with death. The appellant was arraigned before the trial Court for the said offence under Section 221 of the Penal Code. He pleaded not guilty to the charge. The respondent in fulfillment of her duty as proof of the charge against the appellant called seven witnesses, among whom are the neighbor to the appellant, the community leader of Marusa Quarters, and the investigating officer who conducted an investigation on the case. The appellant on his part, who testified as DW1, gave evidence for himself in defense of the charge against him and closed his defense.

Upon the full prosecution of the case against the appellant, he was found guilty on the one-count charge, convicted, and sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment with hard labor.

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the appellant appealed against the same in the instant appeal.

ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION:
The Court adopted the sole issue formulated by the appellant in the determination of the appeal, thus:

“Whether from the totality of the evidence adduced at the trial by the prosecution, the lower Court was right in convicting the Appellant for the offence of culpable homicide not punishable with death under Section 224 of the Penal Code and sentencing the Appellant to (15) fifteen year’s imprisonment with hard labor.

DECISION/HELD:
In conclusion, the Court dismissed the appeal.

RATIOS:
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF CULPABLE HOMICIDE PUNISHABLE WITH DEATH: Ingredients the prosecution must prove to establish the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death; standard of proof required to prove same
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- CONVICTION: Whether conviction can be secured in the absence of the body of the deceased
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- CONVICTION: Whether an accused person can be convicted for an offence other than that charged
• EVIDENCE- CALLING OF WITNESS(ES): Whether the prosecution is bound to call a host of witnesses or a particular witness
• EVIDENCE- MEDICAL EVIDENCE: Purpose of autopsy

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol