CaseLaw
Okoh V. State (1984) CLR 11(d) (SC)
Judgement delivered on November 1st 1984
Brief
Facts
The facts of this case are that the appellant stood his trial first before the Armed Robbery Tribunal established under the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provi¬sions) Act 1970 in September, 1979 but by Decree No. 105 of 1979 titled 'Con¬stitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Certain Repeals etc.) Decree No. 105,' the Armed Robbery Tribunal was abolished as from 1st October, 1979 and its juris¬diction to try armed robbery cases transferred to the High Court.
The appellant was subsequently taken to the High Court to stand his trial. The unfortunate episode in this matter is that before the trial in the High Court, a group of persons who formerly constituted the Armed Robbery Tribunal sat on the 12th day of October, 1979, delivered a purported judgment convicting the appellant and sentencing the appellant to death. It was conceded by learned counsel quite rightly, that that conviction and sentence was a nullity as the purported tribunal had no competence to deliver judgment convicting the appellant and sentencing him to death. In fact, there was no Armed Robbery Tribunal in existence. The exer¬cise was an illegality of the worst kind. The judgment was a nullity.
Coming to the facts of the case revealed at the trial before the High Court, the appellant, a very close family friend of the 1st and 2nd p.w., in company of others went to their premises at Adeoyo Hospital Area Ring Road in the night of 18th January, 1979 and robbed the 1st p.w. of the sum of N280.00 and beads, trinkets, two damask and some lace materials valued at about N3,000.00 to N4,000.00. He was half masked and armed with a pistol, hammer and matchet (knife). To effect the robbery, they broke into the room of 1st p.w., wife of 2nd p.w. woke her up and at gun point the appellant demanded and took the money and articles. Throughout the period, he engaged in discussion with 1st p.w. as a result of which 1st p.w. recognised him vividly and after the operation, mentioned him to 2nd p.w. and identified him to the police.
The 2nd p.w. in his testimony said he regarded him before incident as his best friend and that the trust he had in him arose from six months association with him when he laid out a beautiful flower garden for him and laid floor tiles in the rooms of his house. This was followed by frequent visits during which he helped to iron their clothes and arranged them in the wardrobe from which he later stole them.
On these facts, the High Court, quite justifiably, convicted the appellant and sentenced him to death. His appeal to the Court of Appeal was property dismissed.