ADISA V. THE STATE

• Pages: 142-145

142



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1964] N.S.C.C.

These rules were not referred to by learned counsel on either side; the view we

are taking is without the aid of argument. Seeing that the provisions of the Evi-

dence Ordinance are saved by Rule 9, we think that a confession which is ad-

missible under that Ordinance may, though not recorded in writing, be received

in evidence. We do not know of any decision that evidence of an oral confession



5

which was made after caution and was free and voluntary cannot be given if it is

not recorded and signed; nor was it so argued. The argument seems to be that

because the Criminal Procedure Code permits the record of a confession in the

case diary to be given in evidence, it prohibits any other evidence of a confession

made to a police officer. This would be a change in the law of Evidence by im-



10

plication; but the implication does not seem to us to be necessary; and we think

that if any such change had been intended, clear language to effect it would have

been used.

The evidence against the first appellant sustains the conviction in our view; but

we think that the evidence against the second appellant does not. In truth his con-



15

viction was based on guilty association: he was seen with the first appellant enter-

ing the bus at Jos, and the reasoning seems to be that he must have been with him

at the scene of the robbery. That does not necessarily follow; nor does the failure

of the second appellant's alibi serve in this case to prove his guilt. It is ordered

as follows:-



20

The conviction and sentence of Alexander Nwosu in the Jos High Court Charge

No. JD/300f 1962 dated 11 December, 1962 is set aside, and a verdict of ac-

quittal shall be entered. In regard to Peter Uche, in that Charge, his conviction

and sentence under the fifth count for robbery with arms and his conviction



25

and sentence under the fourth count for offering a bribe to the Police shall stand,

but the conviction and sentence for brigandage under the first count is set aside

on the ground that it is wrong in law to have a conviction and sentence twice

over for the same robbery.

30

ADISA V. THE STATE

35

MOMODU ADISA

V

THE STATE

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

BR ET



J.S.C.

TAYLOR,



J.S.C.

BAIRAMIAN,



J.S.C.

11th June, 1964

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT.NO. SC 5

7

/

1

964

40

45

Legislation - Evidence Act, ss.198, 205, 207, 208 and 209(c) - Criminal Law

- Statement of Witness to police - When adtnissable - use to which it can

be put.

50

ISSUE:

1. When is an accomplice's statement to the police admissible, and what purpose

can it serve.