CaseLaw
Okonofua V. State (1981) CLR 6(d) (SC)
Judgement delivered on June 5th, 1981
Brief
Facts
The 1st Appellant was the Chief Superintendent of Police in charge of No. 4 Squadron of the Police Mobile Force, Ibadan and he controlled the rations vote for the Squadron. The 2nd Appellant was Assistant Superintendent of Police and was the second in command of the Squadron. He was responsible for ordering rations to be supplied to the Squadron and for certifying receipt of ratio ordered.
The case for the prosecution in the High Court, Ibadan was that in their exuberance to spend the rations vote before it lapsed at the end of the 1974 – 1975 financial year, the two Appellants conspired together to steal and in furtherance of the conspiracy stole several sums of money amounting to N5096.00 from the vote. The two appellants were charged together on information containing seven counts count 1 of conspiracy to steal contrary to section 443; counts 2, 3 and 4 of stealing the sums of N1,744.50, N475 and N200 respectively contrary to section 324(2)(a) and counts 5, 6 and 7 of making false statements by officials in payment Vouchers for the payments of the said sums.
The fraud was hatched and perpetrated through the instrument of a contractor, G A Oriekun (P W 3). He testified that on 18th March, 1975 one P C Okoha invited him to the office of 1st Appellant who told the witness that it was the 2nd Appellant that had sent for him. At the office of the 2nd Appellant, the 2nd Appellant and P W 3 agreed to make a deal in which P W 3 would submit an invoice for the supply of food items to the value of N2621.50 to the Squadron on the understanding that he would not supply all the items on the invoice and the money for the items not supplied would be shared in the proportion of one third to P W 3 and the two thirds to the 2nd Appellant and his confederates.
TPursuant to the arrangement P W 3 prepared the estimate Exhibit 1 of the supply of food items valued at N2621.50 Acting on the instruction of the 2nd appellant, Sgt. Edun (P.W.7) signed the estimate on the 19th March, 1975 in the presence of P W 3. The Local Purchase Order dated 17th March, 1975, exhibit 7, signed by the 1st Appellant, was purported to have been the order for the food items. On 20th March, 1975, the 2nd Appellant passed the estimate, exhibit 1, to Sgt. Olaegbe (p w8) with instructions to prepare a payment voucher for the same. PW8 prepared the payment voucher for N261.50, exhibit 5, showing the goods had been supplied. Two certificates were endorsed on the voucher, one signed by the 1st Appellant as the officer controlling expenditure.
The certificate signed by the 2nd appellant reads: “I certify on honour that the foodstuffs were actually supplied by the contractor and untilised for the purpose intended the interest of the of Public service.
On 27th March, 1975 the Police Pay Officer paid to PW3 and full amount of N2621.51 through the cheque for N3096.50, Exhibit 3. The cheque included another payment of N475 which I shall consider IN due course P W 3 testified that he had not supplied any foodstuff at the time he was paid in full and that he later supplied some foodstuff worth N877 and nor more. Sgt Edun (PW7) the storekeeper confirmed that only some of the items ordered in exhibit 1 had been delivered to him by the contractor (P.W.3) about two weeks after 19th March, 1975 when the sergeant signed exhibit 1.
The foregoing is the summary of the evidence adduced by the prosecution relating to counts 2 and 5.
The deal giving rise to counts 3 and 6 is as follows. The contractor testified that around 20th March, 975 the 2nd Appellant asked him to assist him to recover the sum of 475 which he (the 2nd Appellant) had spent in buying bread for the Squadron and he asked P.W.3 to back date the estimate to 11th February, 1975. Consequently, P.W.3 prepared back dated estimate for the supply of bread valued at N475, exhibit 2. It is significant to observe that the Local Purchase Order, Exhibit 6, purporting to be the order for the bread was signed by the 1st Appellant and that on 20th March, 1975, the 1st Appellant requested Sgt. Olaleye (p.w.7) to sign the estimate, Exhibit 2, as having received the bread stated therein on 11th February, 1975. In good faith the sergeant signed the estimate though he did not receive a loaf of bread. On the same date the 2nd Appellant passed the estimate to Sgt. Olaegbe (P.W.8) Ikwho prepared the payment Voucher for N475, exhibit 4. Two certificates, similar to the certificate on exhibit 5 which I have earlier on quoted, were signed by the two Appellants on the voucher, exhibit 4, p.w.4 was paid the full amount through the cheque for N3096.50, Exhibit 3, though he did not deliver any bread.
It is pertinent to mention evidence relating to the conduct of the Appellants during the investigation of the case. On 16th May, 1975 the 1st Appellant told Assistant Commissioner of Police, Johnson Odu (P.W.10) that all the foodstuff in question had been supplied and was the store but when the Assistant Commissioner of Police invited the 1st Appellant to check the store, he evaded stock taking until on 5th July, 1975 when the Assistant Commissioner of Police had caught him by surprise. No foodstuff was found in the stores. Earlier, A.S.P. Makinde (P.W.15) had checked the store and found nothing on 2nd May, 1975.
The Commissioner or Police Ibadan, Alhaji Tinubu (P.W.14) testified that the 1st Appellant had confessed to him that there were deals whereby several sums of money had been paid out to a contractor on the pretext that the contractor had supplied foodstuff to the Squadron. The 1st Appellant begged the Commissioner to be lenient to suspend the investigation and offered to buy foodstuff to put in the store. The Commissioner refused to accede to the request and ordered the investigation to continue.
Finally on 23rd May, 1975 the 2nd Appellant delivered to A.S.P Makinde (P.W.15) the sum of N202.50 exhibit 26, which the 2nd Appellant informed the witness was the money collected from his confederates as refund of part of the booty of the fraud.
In spite of the overwhelming evidence implicating the 1st Appellant, he did not offer any explanation except in his statement Exhibit 14, wherein he simply said. I am innocent of this offence. He did not make statement from the dock and did not call any witness.
In his defence the 2nd Appellant denied entering into any conspiracy of procuring and counseling any one to steal. He testified that all his actions were motivated by the exigencies of the ending of the financial year, that although he knew when the certified the payment vouchers that the foodstuff had not been supplied, he acted in good faith believing that they would be supplied later.
The learned trial judge, after having considered the evidence meticulously, believed the evidence adduced by the prosecution and rejected the defence of the Appellants.
The appellants appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal was partly allowed; being dissatisfied with the Court’s decision, they further appealed to the Supreme Court.