THE STATE V. ORUNGUA & ORS.

• Pages: 215-225

THE STATE V. ORUNGUA & ORS.



215

THE STATE V. ORUNGUA & ORS.

5

THE STATE

V

10 JOSIAH ORUNGUA AND OTHERS

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

ADEMOLA,



C.J.N.

LEWIS,



J.S.C.

15



MADARIKAN,



J.S.0

19th June, 1970

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 78/1969

Criminal Law - Practice and procedure - Information filed by the Director of

Public Prosecutions under section 340(2)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act

20



without a preliminary investigation - Whether such procedure had been abolished

by the Criminal Law Act, 1967; s.6(6) England - Criminal Procedure Act

s.363.

"Information" - erroneously referred to as "criminal information" - Whether defect

25



cured by provisions of section 22 of the Interpretation Act 1964.

ISSUES:

1.

Does an information filed by the D.P.P. under s.340(2)(b) of the Criminal

Procedure Act require a preliminary investigation?

30



2. What is the effect of an information being erroneously referred to as "criminal

information?"

FACTS:

The accused persons were charged with various offences and found guilty.

The 2nd accused appealed to the Supreme Court on 2 grounds:

35



(a) that the trial Judge erred in law in trying the Appellant and the others on a

direct information filed before him by the D.P.P. under s.340(2)(b) of the

Criminal Procedure Act being first held when such procedure had been

abolished in England by s.6(6) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 in which case

the procedure is also automatically abolished in Nigeria pursuant to s.363

40



of the Criminal Procedure Act.

(b) that the information on which the accused persons stood trial was entitled

criminal information that the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act does

not make provisions for the filing of criminal information.

HELD:

45



1. S.6(6) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 which abolishes the power to commence

proceedings by criminal information in England in no way affect the power of

a Judge in England to give consent that a bill of indictment be preferred under

s.2(2) of the Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1933.

This section is in

pari materia

to s.340 (2)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act,

50



except that in Nigeria what is preferred is an information not on indictment.

2.

The Chief Justice was acting within his powers under s.340 (2)(b) in granting

his consent to prefer the information in this case.