Whether a Person Can Be Convicted of the Offence of Conspiracy Where His Co-Accused Have Been Discharged of the Same

CASE TITLE: SANI v. STATE (2025) LPELR-81692(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE:  18TH JULY, 2025

PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

LEAD JUDGMENT: MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on Criminal Law and Procedure.

FACTS:

This appeal emanated from the judgment of the High Court of Zamfara State, delivered by Hon. Justice Kabiru Umaru on 3/7/2024.

The Appellant admitted the commission of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and armed robbery by giving vivid account of how himself, one Yawale Salisu and his friend agreed and in furtherance of which they lured the deceased to a bush wherein he was dispossessed of his Boxer motorcycle after being killed and left behind in the bush.

The Appellant (1st accused) and the said Yawale Salisu were arraigned before the trial Court on charges of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and armed robbery under Sections 6(b) and 1(2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provision) Act, Cap. R11 of the Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. Both the Appellant and his co-accused pleaded not guilty, and the case proceeded to trial. At the trial, the prosecution called two witnesses and tendered their respective statements to the police, marked Exhibits 1 and 1A and 2 and 2A. The Appellant and his co-accused testified in their defence but called no other witness.

Following the conclusion of evidence and addresses by the prosecution and the defence, the trial Court delivered its judgment wherein the Appellant was found guilty of the offences of criminal conspiracy and armed robbery under Sections 6(b) and 1 (2) (a) (b) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provision) Act, Cap. R11 of the Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 and culpable homicide under Section 221 of the Penal Code. The Appellant was accordingly sentenced to life imprisonment.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:

The Court determined the appeal on two issues, viz:

“1. Whether the Honourable trial Court was right in convicting the Appellant for conspiracy to commit armed robbery despite the acquittal of his co-accused.

2. Whether the guilt of the Appellant was proved beyond reasonable doubt having regard to the evidence adduced before the trial Court.”

DECISION/HELD:

In the final analysis, the appeal was allowed. The Appellant was accordingly discharged and acquitted.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY: Position of the law where conspiracy exists between an accused and persons unknown/persons at large
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY: Whether the Court can convict an accused person charged with the offence of conspiracy where co-accused have been discharged of same
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF ROBBERY/ARMED ROBBERY: Ingredients required to be proved by the prosecution to establish the offence of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and armed robbery
• EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Whether a Court can convict on a retracted/denied confessional statement; tests that must be satisfied before same can be done
• EVIDENCE- CORROBORATION/CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE: Nature of corroborative evidence required to prove the commission of a crime

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