Guardian Law ReportIn the Court of Appeal,Ilorin Judicial Division,Holden at Ilorin,On Thursday, November 3, 2011,Before their Lordships:Tijjani Abdullahi, Justice, Court of Appeal;Joseph Shagbaor Ikyegh, Justice, Court of Appeal;Ita George Mbaba, Justice, Court of Appeal;Appeal No. CA/IL/C.14/2011Between: :Sebo Bello '. (appellant)andThe State '. (respondent)Judgment (Delivered by Tijjani Abdullahi, (J.C.A)AGAIN, in the case of Gamno Garba vs. The State, unreported Appeal No. CA/J/226C/2005, this court per I.G. Mbaba, J.C.A. said: 'I hold that, going by the evidence adduced before the trial court, that court was not right to have convicted the appellant and sentenced him to death. The case of the prosecution was replete with doubts and was wanting.The work of a judge is a very delicate and sacred job, especially as he is sometimes vested with the power to play God in determining the fate of his fellow men. The office must be exercised in deep humility and utmost case and deference to the rule of law and fear of God, such that, if it becomes inevitable to pronounce on the death (or any punishment) of an accused person arraigned before him, after due trial, the evidence adduced and the law will stand to vindicate him in his decision'.This brings me to the well-known maxim of our criminal jurisprudence that, justice delayed is justice denied.As a corollary to this, one cannot be wrong to say that justice rushed is equally justice denied. The question to be asked at this stage is this, can it be said that justice was not rushed in this matter' This question must be answered in the affirmative in view of the inexplicable reason why the statement of the appellant said to be confessional, was rejected in evidence without conducting a trial-within-trial, simply because the prosecuting state counsel had conceded that same was obtained involuntarily in spite of the evidence of PW2 who recorded the statement of the appellant.It is now settled beyond peradventure that once a statement is objected on the ground of involuntariness, a trial-within-trial should and ought to be conducted with a view of finding out whether or not the statement is admissible in evidence.It is my considered view and I hold same very strongly that, justice in the words of the erudite emeritus Justice of the apex court, Irekefe, JSC, (as he then was) of blessed memory, would cease to be just, if viewed only from the end of the accused. There must be justice from the end of the accused. There must be also justice from the end of the wronged. See Nafiu Rabiu vs. The State (1980) NSCC 291 at 311 (paras 5-10).Again, in the case of Okegbu vs. The State (1979) 11 SC 56 at 68, also reported in (1979) NSCC 151 at 180 (para 45), our departed learned law lord, Aniagolu, JSC pointedly held that: 'It so often happens that in murder cases, the defence usually talks of justice only in relation to the accused person. Very often, justice as it affects the victim of the murder charge, is either forgotten or ignored by the defence. But just as it is essential that justice be done to the prisoner, so must it also be done to the deceased who, even in the lonely depths of his grave, cries out loudly for the circumstances of his death to be justly examined and justice meted to him'.I say no more on this aspect of the appeal under consideration.Be that as it may, in the light of all that has been said, this issue must be resolved in favour of the appellant and against the respondent. The appeal of the appellant is meritorious and it is hereby allowed. The conviction and the sentence of the appellant are hereby quashed. The appellant is discharged and acquitted forthwith.' Mr. Olalekan Yusuf appears with Mr. Adeyemi O. for the appellant.' J.A. Mumini DPP, Kwara State with M. A. F. Akande PSC, B.A. Baraje (Mrs.), F.S. Eleja (Mrs.), SSC and R.A. Shittu (Mrs.) SSC for the respondent.
Click here to read full news..
