BELLO V. THE STATE

• Pages: 282-284

282



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1968] N.S.C.C.

BELLO V. THE STATE

5

MAHAMMADU BELLO



APPELLANT

V

THE STATE



RESPONDENT



10

SUIT NO. SC 121/1968

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

ADEMOLA,



C.J.N.

COKER,



J.S.C.

LEWIS,



J.S.C.



15

29th November, 1968.

Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide punishable with death - Provocation - Abusive

words - Accused not present when words used - 1

,

11wilier circumstances exist

to justify reduction of offence.



20

Criminal Law and Procedure - Conviction - Judgment - Criminal Procedure Code

- S.269(2) - Court specifying facts to which subsection refers - Whether

sufficient compliance with it.

25

ISSUES:

1.

Whether a defendant in a homicide case can successfully plead provocation

occasioned by abusive words uttered in his absence by the deceased.

2.

Whether the concluding portion of a judgment must contain the ingredients of

s.269(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, where the judgment in earlier portions



30

already contains all these ingredients.

FACTS:

The appellant was charged before the Maiduguri High Court with culpable ho-

micide punishable with death, under S.221 of the Penal Code.

Several witnesses testified for the prosecution, and the appellant's statement to



35

the police was admitted as exhibit 1. In his statement the appellant had stated that

he killed the deceased after hearing that the deceased had abused his (the appel-

lant's) father. The trial judge concluded that exhibit 1 was voluntarily made and

that in it the appellant did not excuse his act, accordingly he convicted him as

charged. On appeal to the Supreme Court, learned counsel for the appellant sub-



40

miffed that since exhibit 1 was accepted by the trial judge, the court should have

found provocation established and should not have convicted the appellant under

S.221, but of the lesser offence of unlawful killing not punishable with death. Coun-

sel further argued that the judgment did not comply with the provisions of S.269(2)

of the Criminal Procedure Code.



45

HELD:

1. It is true that there are circumstances in which words alone could amount to

such provocation as to justify a verdict on a reduced offence. In this case, no

circumstances existed to justify such a course of action. The abusive words

complained of were not given in evidence and it was significant that the



50

appellant was not present when it was alleged by his father that the deceased

abused him. In those circumstances no basis existed for the contention that

the appellant acted under such provocation as on the spur of the moment would