|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2011 |
|
|
|
17 October 2011 |
|
Failure to conduct required voir dire rendered the child witness’s evidence inadmissible, so the conviction was quashed.
Criminal law – Evidence Act s.127(2) – voir dire for child witnesses; incapacity to swear renders child evidence inadmissible; Criminal Procedure Act ss.50–51 cautioned statements; s.240(3) medical report rights; conviction unsafe where sole admissible evidence absent.
|
17 October 2011 |
|
Conviction quashed where unsatisfactory child evidence, unsigned confession and failure to prove attempted rape elements undermined prosecution's case.
Sexual offences — Rape/attempted rape — Admissibility and corroboration of confession — Unsigned confession before village leaders — Credibility of child witness — Requirement to call victim — Elements of attempted rape (threat/intimidation).
|
16 October 2011 |
|
Conviction quashed where investigator absent, PF3 irregularly admitted, and preliminary-hearing admissions invalid after charge substitution.
Criminal procedure — Prosecution by officer below prescribed rank — curability under s.388 CPA; Evidence — adverse inference for non-calling of investigator; Admissibility — PF3 improperly admitted without informing accused of s.240(3) rights; Preliminary hearing — need for fresh plea/hearing after charge substitution; Sufficiency of evidence — conviction quashed where material evidence expunged.
|
14 October 2011 |
|
Identification evidence was unsafe; failure to apply Waziri guidelines rendered convictions a miscarriage of justice.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification at night with unspecified lighting; application of Waziri Amani guidelines; absence of identification parade; miscarriage of justice leading to quashing of convictions.
|
14 October 2011 |
|
Concurrent factual findings upheld; PF3 expunged for non‑compliance, conviction sustained and appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Identification of accused caught at scene – Dock identification not involved; Evidence – contradictions – no material contradictions between PW1 and PW2; Evidence – fabrication – allegation unsupported; Criminal Procedure Act s.240(3) – non‑compliance requires expunging PF3; Appeals – concurrent findings of fact will not be disturbed absent misdirection.
|
14 October 2011 |
|
Court upheld armed robbery conviction despite expunging PF3 for non‑compliance with s.240(3).
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Identification at scene (caught red‑handed) vs dock identification; concurrent findings of fact – deference on second appeal; Criminal Procedure Act s.240(3) – right to call medical officer, non‑compliance renders PF3 inadmissible and subject to expungement; sufficiency of evidence and proof beyond reasonable doubt.
|
14 October 2011 |
|
The applicant's conviction was quashed for unreliable witness evidence, an unsigned confession, and failure to call the child victim.
Criminal law – sexual offences – sufficiency of evidence – credibility of child witness – corroboration – unsigned alleged confession inadmissible – failure to call child victim – elements of attempted rape (threat/intimidation) not proved.
|
14 October 2011 |
|
Delay in reporting and a procedural defect did not overturn conviction where identification evidence remained credible.
Criminal law – Rape – Identification evidence and credibility of complainant – delay in reporting and effect on credibility. Evidence – Harmless procedural irregularity: inadmissible PF3 discarded and not relied upon. Criminal Procedure Act s.234(3) – Variance in time between charge and evidence immaterial where no prejudice. Appellate review – limited interference with trial court credibility findings absent misapprehension of evidence.
|
11 October 2011 |
|
Daytime visual identification by a known witness can suffice for conviction; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – armed robbery – reliance on visual identification – circumstances making identification reliable (daylight, prior acquaintance). Evidence – no absolute requirement for corroboration where witness credibility and favourable conditions eliminate likelihood of mistaken identity. Criminal procedure – section 192(3) does not require listing witness names at preliminary hearing. Appeal – deference to concurrent findings of fact absent misdirection or miscarriage of justice.
|
10 October 2011 |
|
Uncorroborated child testimony properly admitted under s127(7); conviction for unnatural offence upheld.
Evidence Act s127(2), s127(7) – Child/victim of sexual offence’s uncorroborated evidence may suffice where court records reasons and is satisfied of truthfulness. Appellate review – second appeal limited in disturbing concurrent findings of fact absent misdirection or non‑direction. Criminal proof – sufficiency depends on credibility and reliability of evidence, not number of witnesses. Evidence – PF.3 inadmissible in practical effect if doctor not called and section 240(3) rights not observed.
|
10 October 2011 |
|
Unsworn testimony of a 17-year-old (not a 'child of tender age') is inadmissible and insufficient to support a rape conviction.
Criminal law – rape – sufficiency of evidence; admissibility of complainant's unsworn testimony. Evidence – s198 Criminal Procedure Act (oath requirement); s127 Evidence Act (child of tender age exception limited to apparent age ≤14). Criminal Procedure Act – non-compliance with s50 (cautioned statements) and s240(3) (PF.3/medical witness) renders such evidence unreliable. Burden of proof – prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; unsafe conviction quashed.
|
7 October 2011 |
|
Attempted rape conviction quashed for omitting threat element; substituted to sexual harassment and sentence reduced.
Criminal law – Attempted rape – charge must disclose essential elements (including 'threatening' under s132(1)(2)(a)) – omission incurable under s388; admissibility and credibility of family witnesses; substitution to lesser offence (s138D) and sentence reduction under s4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
|
7 October 2011 |
|
Failure to provide an interpreter for an unversed accused vitiates trial fairness and warrants retrial.
Criminal procedure — Right to fair trial — Language of trial and interpretation — Duty of court to provide an interpreter — Failure to provide interpreter vitiates trial — Retrial ordered; acquittal unaffected.
|
7 October 2011 |
|
Daytime identification by a known eyewitness can uphold an armed robbery conviction despite lack of corroboration.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – identification evidence – visual identification by a known witness in daylight – reliability; Corroboration – when uncorroborated eyewitness evidence suffices; Criminal procedure – preliminary hearing – Section 192(3) does not mandate naming witnesses; Appeals – deference to concurrent findings of fact absent misdirection or miscarriage of justice.
|
7 October 2011 |
|
Proper voir dire and reasons under section 127(7) allowed conviction on uncorroborated child testimony; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Sexual offences – Child victim evidence – Section 127(2) voir dire and section 127(7) enabling conviction on uncorroborated child evidence if court records reasons. Appellate review – Second appeal – reluctance to disturb concurrent findings of fact absent misdirection. Evidence – PF.3 and section 240(3) compliance; non‑calling of medical officer limits reliance on PF.3. Evidence – No legal duty for prosecution to call investigating officer; focus is on credibility and reliability of evidence.
|
7 October 2011 |
|
Life sentence for rape of a nine-year-old upheld; no contradiction or credibility basis to overturn conviction.
Criminal law – Rape of a child under ten – Section 131(3) Penal Code – life imprisonment mandated; sentencing of offenders under eighteen; appellate review of witness credibility and consistency with medical evidence.
|
7 October 2011 |
|
Single Justice lacked jurisdiction to strike out a notice of appeal under Rule 60(2)(c); matter to be heard by Court.
Court of Appeal Rules 2009 – Rule 60(2)(c) – application to strike out notice of appeal must be heard by the Court, not a single Justice; jurisdiction can be raised at any stage; Rule 130 transitional provisions inapplicable where Rules were already in operation.
|
6 October 2011 |
|
A single Justice lacked jurisdiction under Rule 60(2)(c) to strike out a notice of appeal; reference allowed with costs.
Civil procedure — Court of Appeal Rules 2009 — Rule 60(2)(c): application to strike out a notice of appeal must be heard by the Court, not a single Justice; transitional Rule 130 inapplicable post-2009 Rules; jurisdictional objections may be raised at any stage.
|
6 October 2011 |
|
A single Justice lacked jurisdiction under Rule 60(2)(c) to strike out a notice of appeal; the Court allowed the reference.
Civil procedure – Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – Rule 60(2)(c) – applications to strike out a notice of appeal must be heard by the Court, not a single Justice; Transitional provisions – Rule 130 inapplicable where 2009 Rules already in force; References – generally confined to matters raised before single Justice, but jurisdiction may be raised at any stage.
|
6 October 2011 |
|
|
6 October 2011 |
|
Recognition testimony of the victim can sustain a gang‑rape conviction despite expunction of the PF.3 for s240(3) non‑compliance.
Criminal law – sexual offences – PF.3 and section 240(3) non‑compliance – expunction of PF.3; Identification by recognition – single witness evidence; Gang rape – section 131A Penal Code – mandatory life sentence; Appellate revisional powers – substitution of conviction and sentence.
|
6 October 2011 |
|
Appeal against rape conviction of a nine-year-old dismissed; life sentence lawful under s.131(3) Penal Code.
Criminal law – Rape of a child under ten – Section 131(3) Penal Code mandates life imprisonment – Law of the Child Act 2009 non-retrospective – Appellate review of witness credibility and medical corroboration.
|
5 October 2011 |
|
Eyewitness and corroborative testimony can sustain a rape conviction despite conflicting medical report; appellate court will not disturb supported factual findings.
Criminal law – Rape – Sufficiency of evidence – Complainant’s testimony and corroboration by mother, neighbour and police sufficient to prove rape. Expert evidence – Medical report (PF.3) indicating no rape is not binding where credible eyewitness evidence contradicts it. Appellate review – Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts should not be disturbed if supported by evidence. Credibility – Minor inconsistencies do not necessarily destroy a witness’s credibility.
|
5 October 2011 |
|
Conviction quashed where investigator was not called, PF3 admitted irregularly, and preliminary-hearing defects rendered evidence unsafe.
Criminal procedure – Prosecution by subordinate officer – irregularity curable under s.388 CPA; Evidence – Non-calling of investigator – adverse inference; PF3 – irregular admission without s.240(3) caution – expunged; Preliminary hearing – substituted charge requires fresh plea/re-hearing; Conviction unsafe where prosecution leaves material gaps.
|
4 October 2011 |
|
|
4 October 2011 |
|
Appeal dismissed: unchallenged arresting‑witness evidence and concurrent factual findings upheld, discrepancies deemed immaterial.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence (carnal knowledge) – Identification and credibility of witnesses – Material versus normal discrepancies in testimony – Section 143 Evidence Act – Appellate interference with concurrent findings of fact.
|
4 October 2011 |
|
Whether alleged procedural defects and visual identification flaws vitiated the appellant's armed robbery conviction.
Criminal law — Armed robbery — Visual identification at night — reliability where witnesses know accused; Waziri principles inapplicable. Criminal procedure — Alleged non-compliance with s.99(1) (rank of prosecutor) and s.192(3) (preliminary hearing) — no prejudice, proceedings not vitiated. Appellate review — concurrent findings of fact — interference only where misdirection/miscarriage of justice shown.
|
4 October 2011 |
|
Court upheld armed robbery conviction: identification reliable; procedural irregularities were not fatal.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification – reliability where eyewitnesses are close relatives and had opportunity to observe at night by lantern light. Criminal procedure – Irregularity in prosecutor's rank – curable and not necessarily fatal. Criminal procedure – Failure to hold preliminary hearing (s.192(3)) – does not automatically vitiate proceedings. Appellate review – Concurrent findings of fact will not be disturbed absent misdirection or miscarriage of justice.
|
4 October 2011 |
|
Credible child testimony upheld rape conviction despite conflicting medical PF.3; statutory minimum sentence maintained.
Criminal law – Rape of a child; credibility and corroboration of child and family witnesses; PF.3/medical report as expert evidence not conclusive; appellate restraint on disturbing concurrent findings of fact.
|
4 October 2011 |
|
Omission of grounds in Notice may be cured by affidavit, but applicant failed to show good cause for an extension of time.
Civil procedure - extension of time - Rule 48(1) Notice of Motion requirements; omission of grounds may be cured by affidavit (Valambhia) if grounds and reliefs are clear; requirements for extension: account for all delay, no inordinate delay, diligence, and point of law or apparent illegality on the face of the record; dismissal where applicant fails to show good cause.
|
3 October 2011 |
|
Presence and supplying drinks did not prove the appellant’s guilt for armed robbery and grievous bodily harm.
Criminal procedure – Section 192 CPA – preliminary hearing: omission an irregularity but not necessarily fatal; Identification evidence – poor lighting and chaotic scene affecting reliability; Presence/association versus participation – buying drinks and being known to victims insufficient to prove armed robbery or causing grievous bodily harm; Common intention – no evidence of pre-arranged plan linking appellant to offences.
|
3 October 2011 |
|
Minor evidential discrepancies and omission to hold in-camera proceedings did not vitiate a proven rape conviction; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Rape – Proof of penetration and victim under 18 – consent immaterial under Section 130(2)(e). Evidence – Minor contradictions in witnesses' testimony do not necessarily vitiate conviction if they do not go to the root of the case. Criminal Procedure – Section 39 (things connected with the offence) – exhibits not required where credible oral and corroborating evidence suffice. Criminal Procedure – Section 186(3) (in-camera evidence in sexual offence trials) – omission cured by Section 388 where no prejudice shown. Procedure – No statutory basis for a 'watching brief' for a complainant under the Act.
|
3 October 2011 |