Principles Guiding the Court in Making an Order of Retrial in a Criminal Matter

CASE TITLE:  Ibrahim v. State (2025) LPELR-81329(SC)

JUDGMENT DATE: 23RD MAY, 2025

PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

LEAD JUDGMENT: TIJJANI ABUBAKAR, J.S.C.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on an order of Retrial in Criminal Matter.

FACTS:

This appeal is therefore against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Kaduna Division in Appeal No. CA/K/147E/C/2015 delivered on the 26th day of March, 2019.

The Appellant in this appeal was charged alongside 8 other co-accused persons before the Kano State High Court on a 3-count charge of conspiracy, culpable homicide punishable with death and causing hurt, contrary to Sections 221(b) and 241 of the Penal Code (Cap 105) Laws of Kano State of Nigeria, respectively.

At the trial, the prosecution called a total number of four witnesses who testified as PW1 – PW4, respectively. During the trial, the prosecution tendered ten exhibits. On the part of the accused Appellant, a total of 12 witnesses were called in defence of his case.

At the conclusion of the trial, the learnt trial Judge in a comprehensive judgment delivered on the 30th day of June, 2014, found the Appellant and his co-accused persons guilty, and they were accordingly convicted of the offences of murder, causing hurt and conspiracy. They were all sentenced to death under Section 221 of the Penal Code and a period of one month for causing grievous hurt. The Appellant became aggrieved and therefore filed an appeal at the lower Court, the Court of Appeal, Kano. On the 26th day of March 2019, the Appellant’s appeal was allowed by the Court of Appeal, and an order of retrial was made before another Judge other than the learnt trial Judge who tried and convicted the Appellant, Hon. Justice Amina Adamu Aliyu. The Appellant was enraged by the order of retrial and therefore further appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION:

The issue considered was whether, in the circumstances of this case, the learned justices of the Court of Appeal were right to make an Order for a fresh trial of the Appellant when the factors for the Court to order a fresh trial do not co-exist in this case.

DECISION/HELD:

The appeal was dismissed. The appellant was ordered to face his retrial as ordered by the Court of Appeal.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- ARRAIGNMENT/TAKING OF PLEA: Requirements for a valid arraignment; effect of failure to comply with these requirements
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- AMENDMENT OF CHARGE: Whether a fresh plea must be made where there is an amendment to a charge; effect of failure to obtain a fresh plea
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- CRIMINAL TRIAL/PROCEEDINGS: Proper order to make when a trial is declared a nullity
• JUDGMENT AND ORDER- ORDER OF RETRIAL/TRIAL DE NOVO: Principles/factors guiding the Court in making an order of retrial in a criminal matter
• JUDGMENT AND ORDER- ORDER OF RETRIAL/TRIAL DE NOVO: Power of the Court of Appeal to order a retrial in a criminal trial; principles guiding the Court

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