WAYS OF PROVING THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME

CASE TITLE: IWUOHA v. STATE (2019) LPELR-48797(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 1ST NOVEMBER, 2019

PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

LEAD JUDGE: MOORE ASEIMO ABRAHAM ADUMEIN, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION

This appeal borders on Criminal Law and Procedure.

FACTS

The appellant was the 3rd accused in Charge No. B/68C/2010 which was tried and determined by the High Court of Edo State, holden at Benin City. In its judgment, delivered on the 24th day of November 2014 the appellant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence of kidnapping.

This appeal is against the said decision.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION

The appeal was determined on the following issues:-

“1. Whether the prosecution has proved the case of kidnapping against the accused person beyond reasonable doubt.

2. Whether the extrajudicial statement of the appellant Exhibit ‘P2’ was duly admitted in evidence as a confessional statement.
3. Whether the learned trial judge sufficiently complied with the provisions of Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Act after the charge was amended.
4. Whether the identification parade is a sine qua non in all criminal cases.”

DECISION/HELD

In the final analysis, the appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the trial Court was affirmed.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- AMENDMENT OF CHARGE: Position of the law on failure to comply with Section 164 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Law as regards amendment of the charge
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- AMENDMENT OF CHARGE: Position of the law on failure to comply with Section 164 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Law as regards amendment of the charge
• EVIDENCE- TRIAL WITHIN TRIAL: Instances where a trial-within-trial will not be conducted
• EVIDENCE- PROOF: Ways of proving the commission of a crime
• JUSTICE- SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE: Attitude of courts to ensure substantial justice is done.