WHETHER ONE PERSON CAN BE TRIED/CONVICTED FOR THE OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY

CASE TITLE: OKPALANGWU V. FRN (2021) LPELR-52710(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 29TH JANUARY, 2021

PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

LEAD JUDGMENT: ITA GEORGE MBABA, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION

This appeal borders on Criminal Law and Procedure.

FACTS

This is an appeal against the decision of the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos wherein the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the Appellant for offences of conspiracy, forgery, obtaining by false pretence and fraudulent obtaining, contrary to Sections 1 and 8(a) of the Advanced Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006 and Section 2(c) of the Miscellaneous Offences Act, Cap M17, LFN 2004.

Appellant was a staff of First City Monument Bank Plc (FCMB) working in various units and departments. At the time material to the issues in this case, she served as a marketer, in the Business Banking Group (Unit). Among other Portfolios, she was to market the bank by going out to introduce the bank products and win customers for the bank.

Evidence showed that Appellant was the person who introduced the two companies – Revue World Resources Ltd (or Revi World Resources Ltd) and Bizmate Nig. Ltd (or Bizmate Energy Ltd) with the 45 staff of the Company (Bizmate Nig. Ltd) to the Bank for banking business. The bank granted loans to 45 staff of the Bizmate, amounting to N146.6Million. When the Bank ran into troubles of not being able to recover the loans, and discovered possible fraud, or that it had been defrauded, it turned against Appellant and some other staff of the Bank, including Hadishatu Sule (who later was dropped from the charge and made to testify as PW2 for the Bank), ostensibly, for not detecting and/or stopping the loan transaction or that the customers were brought to the Bank by Appellant.

The learned trial Judge in a well-considered judgment convicted and sentenced the Appellant for offences of conspiracy, forgery, obtaining by false pretence and fraudulent obtaining. Dissatisfied, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION

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

1. Whether in the absence of any evidence by the Police of Investigation of the alleged crimes and/or report of same by the Police Investigating Officer (IPO) the trial Court was right to convict the Appellant.

2. Whether the Prosecution had established the ingredients of the various offences – conspiracy, forgery, obtaining by false pretence and stealing/fraudulent obtaining, beyond reasonable doubt to justify Appellant’s conviction and sentence, by the trial Court.

DECISION/HELD

On the whole, the Court found merit in the appeal and accordingly allowed same. The decision of the Federal High Court was therefore set aside. The Appellant was discharged and acquitted.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF OBTAINING BY FALSE PRETENCES – Ingredients of the offence of obtaining by false pretences
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY – Whether one person can be tried/convicted for the offence of conspiracy
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF FORGERY – How to prove the offence of forgery
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY – Ingredients that must be present to prove the offence of conspiracy