AREHIA & ANOR V. THE STATE

• Pages: 85-91

AREHIA & ANOR V. THE STATE



85

AREHIA & ANOR V. THE STATE

5

CHRISTOPHER AREHIA & ANOR

V

10 THE STATE

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 81/1981

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

.

IRIKEFE,



J.S.C.

BELLO,

15



ESO,

ANIAGOLU,

UWAIS,

29th April, 1982

J.S.C.

J.S.C.

J.S.C.

J.S.C.

20



Criminal Law and Procedure - Witness for prosecution - Credibility - contradiction

between evidence of prosecution witnesses - Inconsistencies in witness's statement

to police and his testimony at trial - Courts duty to tender statement to reject

testimony as unreliable - Conviction of manslaughter rightly substituted by

Federal Court of Appeal for acquittal.

25

ISSUES:

1.

Whether a judge should warn himself about the danger of relying on the

evidence of relations of a deceased person in a manslaughter or murder

charge.

2.

Whether a prosecution witness can be cross-examined on a previous statement

30





made by him in writing, withal( such writing being shown to him, or produced

for the purpose of cross- examination.

3.

Whether an accused person c:an be convicted on the basis of contradictory

evidence of prosecution witnesses.

FACTS:

35





The Accused was arraigned before a Bendel State High Court for man-

slaughter, grievous harm and driving without a licence. He was discharged and

acquitted on all counts. The prosecution appealed from the judgment to the

Federal Court of Appeal who allowed the appeal. The Appellant was convicted

of manslaughter and sentenced to three years imprisonment. Appellant thereupon

40





appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that the Court should not have relied

on the evidence of the other prosecution witnesses without warning, because they

were all relations of the deceased boy.

HELD:

1. The fact that the witnesses were related to the deceased does not mean that

45





they were not competent to testify for the prosecution. It was not shown that

they were biased. The appellant himself corroborated their evidence by saying

that he killed the deceased with a car. There was no miscarriage of justice

occasioned by the failure of the Justices of the Federal Court of Appeal to treat

the evidence of the relations of the deceased with caution.

50





2. By the provisions of sections 198, 205 and 208 of the Evidence Act, a witness

may be cross-examined as to previous statements made by him in writing or

reduced into writing by the police or anyone else without such writing being

shown to him or being produced if the purpose of the cross-examination is to

shake the credit of the witness or contradict him. Where the witness admits