Ingredients of the Offence of Mischief by Fire

CASE TITLE: SALISU v. STATE (2023) LPELR-60428(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 26TH MAY, 2023

PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

LEAD JUDGMENT: MOHAMMED BABA IDRIS, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on offences of causing mischief by fire and culpable homicide punishable with death.

FACTS:

This is an appeal arising from the judgment of the High Court of Kaduna State sitting in Kaduna in Charge Number: KDH/KAD/92C/ 2014.

The Appellant herein was arraigned before the trial Court on a two counts charge of the offence of causing mischief by fire under Section 337 of the Penal Code Laws and the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death under Section 221 of the Penal Code Laws of Kaduna State.

The Appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge. The Respondent called 2 (two) witnesses and tendered 2 (two) exhibits.

It was the Respondent’s case that on the 11th day of December, 2010, the Appellant set the room of one Binta Muhammad who they claimed was his girlfriend, on fire which led to her death. The Appellant testified in his own defence and denied ever committing the said offence.

While delivering judgment in the case, the trial Court convicted the Appellant on the two counts. On count one, the Appellant was sentenced into 10 (ten) years imprisonment and a fine of N10,000 while on count two, he was sentenced to death by hanging.

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the Appellant appealed.

ISSUES:

The Court determined the appeal on the sole issue, viz:

Whether the Court below was right in holding that the prosecution had proved its case for the offence of mischief by fire and culpable homicide against the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

DECISION/HELD:

In the final analysis, the appeal was meritorious and accordingly allowed.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF MISCHIEF: What the prosecution must prove in a charge of mischief by fire
• EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Whether a court can convict solely on the confessional statement of an accused person
• EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Effect of retraction of a confessional statement; duty of the Court where a confessional statement is retracted by an accused person
• EVIDENCE- CALLING OF WITNESS(ES): Who is a vital witness and effect of failure to call a vital witness by the prosecution