Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Jammal V. State (1999) CLR 11(I) (CA)

Brief

  • Findings of fact by trial court
  • Judgement of trial court (Attitude to)
  • Circumstantial evidence (Principles governing)
  • Culpable homicide not punishable with death
  • Proof beyond reasonable doubt (Connotation of)
  • Issue of fair hearing

Facts

The prosecution's case is that the accused was the owner of the office/workshop in the same compound where the deceased had lived with his father at Dogo Karfe Jos. Before the incident, the subject-matter of this case, thieves had broken into the accused's office by cutting through the roof and ceiling of the accused's office/workshop and stole quite substantial properties belonging to the accused. It was the prosecution's case that in order to keep thieves and intruders away from the premises, the accused engaged the services of one Salisu, an electrician and instructed him to electrify the roofing zinc of the accused's office/workshop.

On the fateful day, i.e. on 21/1/94, PW6 – Franka Ott at their home with the deceased when suddenly she heard shouts from an inmate – one Lydia calling at the deceased to stand up from the railing and roofing zinc of the accused's office/workshop, she rushed to the spot and held the body of the deceased and pulled the deceased down. At the time, the deceased was already dead. The deceased's father was not at home. At the time, the housing accused's office/workshop. The deceased's relations were alerted and the accused joined them to report the incident at the Abattoir Police Station Jos from where the matter was referred to Anglo Jos Police Station. PW5 a Police Officer removed the deceased body to Jos University Teaching Hospital (JUTH for short) for post mortem examination. The cause of death was given by PW1 (i.e. Dr. Edmond Joseph Chukwu-Elika Nwana, a fellow of the Medical College of Pathology, a University teacher and in Honorary Consultant Pathologist) as due to electrocution that paralysed the respiratory muscles, thus causing respiratory failure and on the body were joule burns. He tendered Exh. 1 as the medical report.

Further in his evidence PW1 identified two possible effects where death was the direct result of electrocution as:

  • 1
    arrest of respiration when domestic current caused death and also joule burns.
  • 2
    arrest of heart where high voltage current caused death.
  • PW4 – Nyam Manu an electrician was invited by the police and in the presence of the accused, the police and other witnesses tested the roofing sheets of the accused's office/workshop and they tested positive to electric current. He switched off power at the control switch in the premises and the roofing sheets tested negative to electric current. He testified that he was prevailed upon by the police and the accused not to trace the source of electric current on the roofing zinc and railing by climbing into the ceiling.

    PW7's evidence was to the effect that thieves had broken into the accused's office/workshop on three other occasions by cutting their way through the roofing and ceiling to gain access and he had to ask his electrician one salisu to energise the roofing zinc to ward off intruders. Salisu was the electrician used by the defence called DW1 and employee of NEPA who on 27/1/94 tested the said roofing zinc but the tested negative to electric current. He tendered Exh. II DW2 (i.e. the accused) testified as DW2. He said he was in construction business and was also running a motor garage at Dogo Karfe Jos. He denied the charge and more particularly, that he told Salisu to electrify the roofing zinc. He accompanied the deceased's relation to the Abbattoir Police Station to report the matter.

    The Appellant was convicted by the High Court of Justice, plateau State, presided over by the Chief Judge sitting at Jos on 26th February, 1996 for the offence of Culpable Homicide not punishable with death and sentenced to 5 (five) years imprisonment without an option of fine.

    Dissatisfied and aggrieved with the conviction and sentence, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Issues

Whether the case against the appellant was prove beyond reasonable doubt as...

Read More