CASE TITLE: BALA v. STATE (2022) LPELR-57475(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 6TH MAY, 2022
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: ITA GEORGE MBABA, J.C.A.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on the Offence of Rape.
FACTS:
This appeal is against the decision of the High Court of Kano State, delivered by Justice Aisha R.D. Muhammad.
The facts of this case showed that the Appellant, about 22 years old at the time of the commission of the offence, had unlawful carnal knowledge of the PW3, a minor of only 10 years of age when she was sent to buy Omo (detergent) from the store which the Appellant operated. The charge alleged that the offence took place on or about 22nd January 2015. He lured the little girl to bed, undressed her, fondled her and had penetrative sexual intercourse with her. The girl cried and he gave her N10.00. She reported the incident to her mother (PW1) who immediately inspected her and found her vagina reddish and swollen. Semen was also found on her pant.
She (PW3) was taken to the Hospital, upon the report of the rape to Hisbah and later to the Police. Appellant made the statement at the Hisbah Office, admitting to committing the offence and the same was tendered as Exhibit A1(Hausa Version) and Exhibit A2 (the English translation). Appellant denied being guilty of the offence of rape with which he was charged.
The trial Court convicted the Appellant and sentenced him to imprisonment for 14 years. Being dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
The Court determined the appeal based on the following issues for determination:
1) Whether or not the trial Court was right to have relied on Exhibit A1-A2 as a confessional statement and to have attached probative value to this Exhibit while holding that Exhibit A recorded by the Police is an afterthought having regard to the statutory duty of the Police to investigate crime?
2) Having regards to the material contradictions in the evidence led by the prosecution in proof of the charge, whether or not, the prosecution has proved the essential ingredients of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt, to have warranted the conviction of the Appellant?
DECISION/HELD:
In the final analysis, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the trial Court.
RATIOS:
CASE TITLE: NCS BOARD v. LAWAL (2024) LPELR-62774(CA)JUDGMENT DATE: 18TH JULY, 2024PRACTICE AREA: CIVIL PROCEDURELEAD…
CASE TITLE: KASUWAV v. NIGERIAN NAVY (2024) LPELR-62921(CA)JUDGMENT DATE: 19TH AUGUST, 2024PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW…
CASE TITLE: EDIDIONG EYEN DEEP SEA FISHING CO-OPERTIVE INVESMENT AND CREDIT SOCIETY LTD v. MOBIL…
INTRODUCTION The new Supreme Court Rules 2024 (the “2024 Rules”) effectively repealed and replaced the…
CASE TITLE: OKORIE & ANOR v. INEC & ORS (2024) LPELR-62967(CA) JUDGMENT DATE: 9TH OCTOBER,…
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden at Abuja On Friday, the 16th day of…