Effect of Failure of an Accused Person to Object to the Procedure used in Taking/Recording His Confessional Statement

CASE TITLE: ADEGBOYEGA v. PEOPLE OF LAGOS STATE (2025) LPELR-81490(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 27TH JUNE, 2025

PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

LEAD JUDGMENT: UWABUNKEONYE ONWOSI, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on Criminal Law and Procedure.

FACTS:

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Lagos State, Ikeja Judicial Division delivered by Hon. S.B.A. Candide-Johnson on the 25th of June, 2019, in Suit No: LCD/248/2011.

The Appellant as the 1st Defendant and two others were arraigned at the trial Court, on a three-count charge of stealing the sum of N231,500,000.00 (Two Hundred and Thirty-one Million, Five Hundred Thousand Naira) and N14,600,000.00 (Fourteen Million, Six Hundred Thousand Naira) belonging to Inter Capital Securities Ltd, now Morgan Capital Securities Limited.

The complainant in this case is International Capital, which is a stockbroking firm, and part of its business included receiving money from clients and using the money to purchase stocks desired/instructed by its client. Platinum Capital Limited (“PCL”) is a client of International Capital. On 23 March 2007, PCL issued its cheque in the sum of N284.1 million (Two Hundred and Eighty-Four point One Million Naira, Only), in favour of International Capital to be used to purchase stocks for PCL. In addition, PCL wrote a letter dated 5 April 2007 to International Capital which contained the instruction that PCL’s N284.1 million (Two Hundred and Eighty-Four point One Million Naira, Only) should be used to purchase 50 (Fifty) million units of WEMA Bank shares and (One) 1 million units of Dangote Sugar shares for PCL. PW1 and Appellant both testified that the N284.1 million (Two Hundred and Eighty-Four point One Million Naira, Only) cleared into the Sterling Bank account of International Capital and not into Appellant’s account.

The prosecution, through PW1 and PW3, alleged that the Appellant stole the proceeds of the two cheques by diverting them into the bank accounts of three companies, namely Greenfield Resources Limited, Bancass Capital Management Limited and Global Resources Limited, which are companies purportedly owned by the Appellant and members of his family.

The matter proceeded to trial. At the end of the trial, judgment was delivered by the trial Court. The Appellant was convicted as charged, while the 2nd and 3rd Defendants were discharged and acquitted. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the Appellant filed this appeal by a notice of appeal containing 10 grounds of appeal.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:

The Court decided the appeal on the issues distilled by the appellant which read thus:

1. Whether Exhibit 5-5G (i.e., Appellant’s police statement) breached Section 9(3) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos State 2007 and ought to have been disregarded and/orexpunged by the Lower Court from its records.

2. Whether Exhibit 5-5G (i.e., Appellant’s police statements) has probative value that is sufficient to prove or sustain the two-count offence of stealing alleged against the Appellant.

3. Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution established the essential ingredient of the offence of stealing against the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

DECISION/HELD:

On the whole, the Court found no merit in the appeal, and it was thus dismissed. Consequently, the judgment of the High Court of Lagos State, Ikeja Judicial Division, delivered by Hon. S.B.A. Candide-Johnson in Suit No: LCD/248/2011, was affirmed.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF STEALING/THEFT: Definition of the offence of stealing; ingredients of the offence of stealing.
• EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/ONUS OF PROOF: Whether he who asserts must prove
• EVIDENCE- ADDRESS OF COUNSEL: Whether address/argument of counsel can take the place of facts/evidence
• EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Whether Section 9(3) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos is applicable where an accused person failed to object to the admissibility of a confessional statement
• EVIDENCE- EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE: Whether evaluation of evidence and ascription of probative value is a primary function of the trial Court
• EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Effect of a confessional statement admitted without objection
• EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Effect of failure of an accused person to object to the procedure used in taking/recording his confessional statement; proper time to raise objection as to admissibility of the confessional statement
• JUDGMENT AND ORDER- ERROR/MISTAKE IN JUDGMENT: What the slip rule connotes

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