INGREDIENTS OF THE OFFENCE OF RAPE

CASE TITLE: PC. SALISU MAMUDA v. THE STATE (2019) LPELR-46343(SC)

JUDGMENT DATE: 11TH JANUARY, 2019

PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

LEAD JUDGMENT: MUSA DATTIJO MUHAMMAD, J.S.C.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on Criminal Law and Procedure.

FACTS:

This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal sitting in Kaduna.

The appellant who was arraigned and charged along with five others inter-alia for rape contrary to Section 283 of the Penal Code law at the Kano State High Court, was found guilty under the 11th, 12th and 13th heads of charge for raping one Hindatu Sani on the 26th, 27th and 28 of October 2010 respectively. 

On conviction, he was sentenced to seven years imprisonment and a N50, 000.00k (fifty thousand naira) fine for each of the head of the three-count charge. In default of the payment of the fine, a six-month term of imprisonment was to be served for each head of the charge. The imprisonment terms were ordered to run concurrently.

Dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal, Kaduna Division, on a notice containing five grounds filed on the 25th June 2012. The appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. Further dissatisfied, the Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:

The Supreme Court determined the appeal on the issues couched as follows:

APPELLANT’S ISSUES

i. Whether in view of the totality of facts and circumstances of this case and the evidence properly before the trial Court, the Court below was right when it confirms the decision of the trial Court.

ii. Whether the contradictions in the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies is not material and fundamental to render their evidence unreliable and without probative value.

iii. Whether the Lower Appellate Court was right in its findings that there was no breach to the Appellant’s right to fair hearing in the conduct of the entire proceedings. 

RESPONDENT’S ISSUES

i. Whether the Court below was right to have affirmed the decision of the trial lower Court that the Respondent has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

ii. Whether the Court below was right to have affirmed the decision of the trial lower Court that there was no material contradiction in the respondent’s case.

iii. Whether the Court below was right to have held that the appellant’s right to fair hearing has not been breached.

DECISION/HELD:

On the whole, the apex Court found no merit in the appeal and accordingly dismissed same.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF RAPE: Ingredients the prosecution must prove to succeed in a charge of rape
• EVIDENCE – CONTRADICTION IN EVIDENCE: Position of the law as regards contradictions in evidence
• INTERPRETATION OF STATUTE – RULES OF INTERPRETATION OF STATUTE: Guiding principles in interpretation of statutes
• APPEAL – INTERFERENCE WITH CONCURRENT FINDING(S) OF FACT(S): Instances where the Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact(s) made by Lower Courts