CaseLaw
Adeleke V. State (2013) CLR 7(L) (SC)
Judgement delivered on July 19th 2013
Brief
Facts
The facts of this case as shown in the record are that the 2nd accused person, one Mumuni Olaoye was the driver of P.W. 1, Mrs. Monsuratu Moni Babatunde, who was the victim of the crime, and has driven her for three months prior to the present incident, had on 14/3/2002 driven P.W.1 to All State Trust Bank Ibadan where she withdrew the sum of =N=500,000:00 which she intended to take to Lagos for business the following day. The 2nd accused person asked P.W.1 for the sum of =N=5,000:00 loan which the P.W.1 refused because she had just paid him his salary. The next day, that is 15/3/2011 P.W.1, her daughter Temitope, her ward and Morufat Adebayo (P.W.2) left for Lagos driven by the 2nd accused person. P.W.1 instructed him to buy petrol at challenge Ibadan but he refused and insisted that he would buy it elsewhere. He began the journey to Lagos on the fast lane of the Expressway but suddenly changed to the slow lane. When he was asked by the P.W.1 whether there was any problem his response was that there was none. In the course of their journey to Lagos a black Mercedes Benz car which drove parallel to them asked the 2nd accused person to stop and park at the roadside. The occupants of the black car claimed to be policemen.
P.W.1 suspected that they could not be police men and ordered him not to heed to them but to accelerate further. P.W.1 noticed that the driver did not heed to her instruction, she asked him to vacate the drivers seat so that she would take over the driving herself and speed off from the intruders but he ignored her and parked the car and the other black car also parked some meters away and the occupants of the black car came down with iron rod. P.W.1 again ordered the driver to start the car but he refused. One of the robbers then went to P.W.1 while the other went to the driver, the 2nd accused person, the driver alighted from the vehicle and discussed with the robbers. Thereafter, one of the robbers went to P.W.1 and told her that they were armed robbers. P.W.1 then alighted from the car and the robbers demanded for the money. One of the robbers took the bag from one of the occupants of P.W.1's car, opened it and went back to the driver. He then went back to the P.W.1 and specifically demanded for the bag containing N500,000:00 bring the bag.
The robber then went into the car and took the bag containing the money, he asked the PW. 1 to lie down and demanded to know whether the N500,000:00 was complete. The driver also told the P.W.1 and other occupants in the P.W.1's car to lie down because the robbers had guns. The robbers then went into the P.W.1's car to remove the ignition key, when they could not remove it they called the driver who removed it and gave them. The driver then told the P.W.1 to leave everything to God. PW.1 and other occupants returned to Ibadan and reported at the Police Station, but they were directed to Owode-Egba Police Station. The 2nd accused person, the driver was arrested which led to the arrest of the 1st accused person. After the evidence of the appellant and after the counsel' addresses, the trial court per Shoremi J. (as he then was held as follows at pages 49-50 of the record:
“Having gone so far and from the circumstances of the case it is quite clear from the evidence of the 1st and 2nd prosecution witnesses together with unsolicited confession of the 1st and 2nd accused persons that an offence had been committed. The denial of the 1st and 2nd accused persons of their involvement in the crime is an after thought. At this stage, I intended to go back to the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution as to style of commission of this crime. There is none of the witnesses who said categorically that any of the accused persons held any gun or dangerous weapon. The only next thing to any weapon held came from the 1st prosecution witness who said she saw one of them holding an iron rod when he was two poles away from her. She was not threatened when he came over. Nobody was injured. In fact to me the accused persons and their cohorts were amateurs in the business of robbery.
There is no doubt that there are sufficient evidence to prove commission of intention and the result of the action of those concerned is criminal. The question as to which one of them did what is immaterial. See: Nwali v. The State (1971) 1 NMLR at 78. From the totality of the evidence adduced the offence of conspiracy is proved against the 1st and 2nd accused persons (sic) and I convict them accordingly. I find the 1st and 2nd accused persons guilty of the offence of robbery under section 1 subsection 1 of the robbery and firearms (Special Provision Act) Cap. 398, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990 (as amended).”
On appeal to the Court of Appeal, the lower court affirmed this finding of the trial court as per Alagoa, JCA (as he then was) and held as follows:-
“There can be no doubt that from their confessional statements the 1st and
2nd appellants conspired to rob P.W.1 of =N=500,000:00 on the 15th March, 2002. 2nd appellant told the 1st appellant about the withdrawal by P.W.1 of the sum of =N=500,000:00 from All States First Bank on the 14th March, 2002. They had discussion with other persons and planned how they were going to carry out the robbery operation. Conspiracy is a separate offence and I am satisfied that the prosecution has proved the case of conspiracy against the 1st and 2nd appellants beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment of the learned trial Judge is certainly not perverse as –