FILANI V. BORNU NATIVE AUTHORITY

• Pages: 225-227

FILANI V. BORNU NATIVE AUTHORITY.



225

what happened when Ayiwe first entered the appellant's house. On

the whole we

do not feel able to say that no substantial miscarriage of justice has occurred

through the Judge's failure to consider the evidence of provocation. In taking this

view we are following the passage in the judgment of the Judicial Committee in

5



Bullard v. The Queen

(1957) A.C. 635, which reads "Every man on trial for mur-

der has the right to have the issue of manslaughter left to the jury if there is any evi-

dence on which such a verdict can be given. To deprive him of this right must of

necessity constitute a grave miscarriage of justice and it is idle to speculate what

verdict the jury would have reached". For these reasons we substitute for the ver-

10



dict found by the Judge a verdict of guilty of manslaughter, and pass a sentence

of twelve years' imprisonment with hard labour in substitution for the sentence of

death

Appeal allowed:

Conviction of murder quashed:

Conviction of manslaughter

substituted:

Altered to twelve years

imprisonment with hard labour.

FILANI V. BORNU NATIVE AUTHORITY.

25

30

TAMBAYA FILANI

V

BORNU NATIVE AUTHORITY

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. FSC 212/1961

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.

BRE 1 I ,



AG. C.J.F.

HURLEY,



C.J.N.

BELLAMY,



AG. C.J. Lagos.

35



11th August, 1961

Criminal Law and Procedure - Mal - irregularity - Omission to ask accused

names and whereabouts of witnesses - N.R. Criminal Procedure Code (N.R.

No. 11 of 1961), section 389

40

Criminal Law - Appeal - Irregularify at Trial - Not amounting to miscarriage of

justice.

ISSUE:

45



1. Whether the Federal Supreme Court would set aside a conviction because of

an irregularity, not objected to, and which does not occasion a miscarriage of

justice.

FACTS:

The appellant together with one M was charge before a Native Court with the

50



offence of Culpable Homicide. When the plea was read the appellant pleaded not

guilty. All of the eye-witnesses, save one who could not be traced, gave evidence

for the prosecution. At the close of the prosecution case the trial Court omitted to

ask the appellant to inform the court of the names and whereabout of his witnesses,

as required by section 389 of the Northern Region Criminal procedure Code, but

15

20