CHUKWU V. THE STATE

• Pages: 44-56

44



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1992] 1 N.S.C.C.

CHUKWU V. THE STATE

ALO CHUKWU



APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE



RESPONDENT

APPEAL No. SC. 151/1990.

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

KARIBI-WHYTE,



J.S.C.

BELGORE,



J.S.C.

WALT,



J.S.C.

A KPATA ,



J.S.C.

OMO,



J.S.C.

17th January, 1992.

Criminal Law and Procedure -

Murder - Witnesses - Duty of prosecution to call same -

Scope of - Whether fatal to the prosecution's case where its witnesses are members of

same community or family with deceased - Defences - Self defence, provocation,

accident - Essential requirements of - When will the defences avail an accused - Whether 25

an accused can properly rely on all the defences on the same evidence.

ISSUES:

1.

What is the scope of the duty of prosecution to call witnesses in criminal cases?

2.

When may the defence of self defence succeed?



30

FACTS:

The appellant, a police constable, was charged for the offence of murder before

the High Court of Port Harcourt. The case for the prosecution was that on 6th

August, 1983 the appellant was on duty as one of the Police constables posted to 35

maintain law and order at the George Ama polling station during the 1983 general

election. The deceased, Wilfred Ned George, was the Presiding Officer at the

Polling Station. At the end of the voting, the appellant and some others including

the deceased were waiting to join a boat to convey them to Okrika Mainland when

the appellant brought out his gun and pointed it at the people. The deceased and

others waiting objected to the appellant's conduct. Then the appellant, at close



40

range, aimed the gun and shot the deceased who fell down at the spot. He died

later in the hospital. The appellant and two other policemen fled and took refuge

in the house of one Chief Jacob George. Many eye-witnesses gave evidence in

support of the prosecution. case.

The case for the appellant was that the gun shot was accidental and that some 45

villagers at the scene had earlier beaten him and it was when he was on the ground

struggling to get up that the accident occurred. The appellant did not however

call any witness.

The learned trial judge believed the evidence of the prosecution and disbe-

lieved the appellant, and he accordingly convicted the appellant of murder. The



50

5

10

15

20