Appellant was a Captain in the Nigerian Army and at the time of the alleged offence serving as Chairman of the Taskforce attached to the NITEL Office Iponri Lagos. On the trial and conviction on a one count charge of conduct prejudicial to service discipline, the Appellant was sentenced to a term of two years in prison.

Not satisfied with that judgment and sentence, Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal or Court below on the ground that the trial Court Martial was not properly constituted and therefore lacked jurisdiction when it tried the Appellant. The Court below dismissed the appeal thereby affirming the decision of the trial Court Martial. Being further dissatisfied, the Appellant has come before this Court on four grounds of appeal.

Briefly stated, the facts are that the Appellant while serving in the Nigerian Army was appointed Chairman of Task Force and deployed to Iponri NITEL Exchange for investigation on the allegation that certain NITEL lines were used for illegal (419) businesses. In the course of performing his duties, the Appellant arrested a staff of Chayoma Ventures for interrogation following a tip-off that the company was into fraudulent business otherwise known as ‘419’. The said staff was handed over to Mr. Odibo Isaac who was a Customer Engineering Manager with NITEL, Iponri Exchange at that time with instruction to investigate the file of the said company. When the Appellant returned to the office that day, Mr. Isaac Odibo gave him an envelope containing the sum of ₦40,000.00 (Forty thousand naira) an amount given to the Appellant by the Managing Director of Chayoma Ventures. The Appellant took the money and in appreciation gave ₦5,000.00 (five thousand naira) to Isaac Odibo.

The Appellant's view is that the ₦40,000.00 was an appreciation by the Managing Director of Chayoma Ventures to the Appellant for the time and effort in carrying out the investigation. The Nigerian Army thought otherwise saying the money was given as gratification for the release of the arrested staff of Chayoma Ventures and on that basis convened the Court Martial which tried and convicted the Appellant.