AGBAJE V. THE REPUBLIC

• Pages: 210-212

210



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1964] N.S.C.C.

boration. Their evidence no doubt supports the theory that an assignment was

given to Enahoro to recruit persons but not that the assignment was given by the

27th accused and corroboration must be such as to connect the accused with the

offence. Secondly, the evidence that the Tactical Committee was formed for the

purpose of or as a means of capturing power at the centre other than by constitu-



5

tional means and as to composition of the Committee was given by Onabamiro

and not corroborated by any other witnesses. Dokotri is an accomplice and his

evidence cannot provide adequate corroboration. Further Dokotri, Maja and Imam

are not mentioned in the particulars of "certain persons" supplied to the Court who

are said to have been procured, solicited, incited or endeavoured to be persuaded



10

or procured. That being so overt act 1 has not in my view been sufficiently proved.

AGBAJE V. THE REPUBLIC



15

LAWRENCE AGBAJE

V

THE REPUBLIC

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 190/1964

20

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

BRETT,



J.S.C.

ONYEAMA,



J.S.C.



25

AJEGBO,



J.S.C.

23rd September, 1964

Legislation - Criminal Procedure Act, s.208- Evidence Act s.222 and s.223 -

Criminal Law - Age of defendant - Trial Court's decision on his age - Jury



30

trial - Questions by jury to witnesses - Desirable limits.

ISSUES:

1.

What evidence should a court consider in determining the age of a defendant

before it?



35

2.

Can a jury put questions to a witness, and if so, what are the desirable limits?

FACTS:

The defendant testified that he was seventeen. The jury convicted him of man-

slaughter and the judge sentenced him to nine years. In the Supreme Court he

complained that the sentence was excessive in view of his age of fifteen years. At



40

the trial the jury questioned many witnesses, including the defendant; one of his

answers suggested that the jury speculated whether he was under the influence of

a narcotic at the time of the offence, although neither party suggested that he was.

But there was no substantial miscarriage of justice in the case.

HELD:



45

1.

The court may take and act on such evidence as is forth coming on the age of

a person before it: Criminal Procedure Act, s.208.

2.

A judge may ask any questions to ascertain relevant facts and a jury may,

through him or by his leave, put similar questions which he considers proper:

Evidence Act, ss.222 and 223.



50

3.

On the defendant's own evidence the judge was in law right in trying him as an

adult and, although the sentence was severe, he was fortunate that the jury took

a favourable view of the evidence as to provocation.