Commissioner Of Police V. Ephraim Alozie (2017)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE, J.S.C.

My Lords, this appeal turns on a very narrow compass. I shall return to it anon. Before then, however, it would only be proper to trace its forensic trajectory from the Court of first instance to this final Court. The respondent herein, Ephraim Alozie, was arraigned before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, for the offences of conspiracy and armed robbery.

In proof of their case, the prosecution called five witnesses, PW1 – PW5. While PW2, a co-accused person, testified in favour of the Prosecution. PW1 and PW5 were the police Officers involved in the investigation of the case. While the PW1 received the report of the robbery incident and recovered certain items from the locus criminis, the Investigating Police Officer, PW5, in his evidence, identified and tendered a confessional statement which the respondent, allegedly made. The said statement was recorded by Emmanuel Okoye who was a member of the Investigating team. The said statement was admitted in the proceedings as Exhibit B.

The evidence of the PW2 was that both himself and the

respondent were members of an armed robbery gang. He, it was, who spied on the victim, the deceased person, prior to the robbery incident.

On his part, the respondent, not only denied making the said Exhibit B, he equally denied committing the offence he was charged with. The said Court (hereinafter, simply, referred to as “the trial Court”), upon finding him guilty as charged, convicted and sentenced him. His appeal to the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division was successful. The said Court (hereinafter, simply referred to as the lower Court”) quashed his conviction and sentence, hence, this further appeal by the prosecution, wherein this Court was entreated to determine the sole question:

Whether the Court below was right in rejecting and expunging the confessional statement, Exhibit B, from the evidence on the ground of failure to conduct trial within trial resulting in the discharge and acquittal of the respondent of the offences of criminal conspiracy and armed robbery

The respondent also, formulated a sole issue for the determination of the appeal. It was framed thus:

Whether the Court below was right and justified in

discharging and acquitting the respondent of the offences of criminal conspiracy and armed robbery

My Lord, I take the view that the appellant sole issue better captures the main agitation of this appeal. It would therefore, be adopted as the sole issue for the determination of this appeal.

Thus, for the avoidance of any doubt, the sole issue for the resolution of the divergent submissions hereunder is:

Whether the Court below was right in rejecting and expunging the confessional statement, Exhibit B, from the evidence on the ground of failure to conduct trial within trial resulting in the discharge and acquittal of the respondent of the offences of criminal conspiracy and armed robbery

ARGUMENTS OF COUNSEL ON THE SOLE ISSUE