KALU V. THE STATE

• Pages: 1-10

KALU V. THE STATE



1

5



KALU V. THE STATE

NGWO KALU

V

10 THE STATE

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

ESO,



J.S.C.

NNAMANI,



J.S.C.

15



KAWU,



J.S.C.

OPUTA,



J.S.C.

BELGORE,



J.S.C.

7th October, 1988

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 56/1987

20

Criminal Law and Procedure - Murder - Discrepancies in evidence of witnesses - Duty of

court.

Evidence - Material Contradictions/Inconsistencies in evidence of witnesses - Effect of -

Standard of proof in criminal cases - Doubt always resolved in favour of accused.

ISSUES:

1.

Whether every minor contradiction in the prosecution's evidence, is fatal to a

case.

2.

Whether a court has power to make a finding on speculation.

3.

Whether a trial Judge should convict an accused person where there are

discrepancies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.

FACTS:

The accused and another person (2nd accused) were charged with the murder

35



of a certain Peter. The prosecution's case was that the two accused persons and

some others had broken into the dormitory where the deceased and some other

boys stayed and attacked them. After the attack, the deceased and some others

were taken to a house where the deceased was killed by the 1st accused on the

order of the 2nd accused. The evidence of two prosecution witnesses as to how

40 and when the deceased died was however contradictory. The trial Judge was of the

view, that it would not be safe to convict the 2nd accused on the evidence of the

prosecution witness because of bad blood that existed between the prosecution wit-

ness's community and the 2nd accused, and therefore acquitted and discharged the

2nd accused



He convicted the 1st accused and sentenced him to death.

45





The accused appealed to the Court of Appeal where his counsel submitted fir-

stly, that the accused ought not to have been convicted, because of the inconsist-

encies in the witnesses' evidence and secondly, that whatever benefit of doubt the

trial Judge had extended to the 2nd accused ought to have been extended to the

accused, since they were both from the same community. The Court of Appeal con-

50



firmed the trial court's judgment.

The accused therefore further appealed to the Supreme Court on the same

grounds it canvassed in the Court of Appeal.

25

30