Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Ajiboye V. State (1994) CLR 11(G) (CA)

Brief

  • Converesion
  • Stealing
  • No case submission

Facts

There are two appellants in the appeal. The first appellant Mr. Olawale Ajiboye is the Managing Director and Chief Executive of the second appellant, Temple City Property Limited. The first appellant was the sole signatory to the accounts of the second appellant.

Sometimes in February 1992, the first appellant was arraigned before Silva J. of the High Court of Lagos State, charged with three distinct criminal offences. In the first count, the first appellant was charged with Murder contrary to Section 319(i) of the Criminal Code. In the second count both appellants were charged jointly with the offence the sum of N3.7 Million from the complainant, McRoyal Holdings Limited, contrary to Section 390(a) of the Criminal Code. In the third count, both appellants were also jointly charged with the offence of stealing the sum of N2.0 Million from McRoyal Holdings Limited, contrary to Section 390(a) of the Criminal Code.

The appellants at the trial pleaded not guilty to their respective charges. The prosecution called 18 witnesses to prove the charges against the appellants. At the close of the case for the prosecution, the learned counsel for the appellants made a no case submission before the trial court pursuant to S.286 of the Criminal Procedure Law of Lagos State. Both counsel for the parties submitted a written brief on the submission of NO CASE to answer and addressed the trial court on same. The learned trial Judge considered their submissions and on the 8th day of December 1992 delivered a ruling in which he discharged the 1st appellant of the charge of murder in count one. But in respect of the two counts of stealing against the two appellants and ordered them to offer their defence. In respect of the two counts, the learned trial Judge had this to say in his ruling:-

  • "The facts unequivocally established a prima facie case of stealing the sums of money charged in each of the 2nd and 3rd counts of the charge against both accused persons. The 1st accused by his own personal acts and by this conduct of the business of the 2nd accused person had obtained money from P.W.1 and P.W.2 for the purchase of two properties which have not up to now been conveyed to McRoyal Holdings Limited and the money had not been returned. To my mind this state of the evidence had established a prima facie case of stealing money belonging to McRoyal Holdings Limited. The two accused persons ought to offer an explanation in their defence if they have any in view of their plea of not guilty."

Dissatisfied with the ruling, the appellants filed an appeal in this court

Issues

Whether the trial court was right in dismissing the no-case submission made by...

Read More