Michael Uzoagba & Anor Vs Commissioner Of Police (2012)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

MUSA DATTIJO MUHAMMAD, ,J.S.C.

This Judgment relates to appeals No.SC.109/2010 and SC.109A/2010 pursuant to the Appellants respective Notices dated and filed on the 21st January 2010 containing two grounds each.

The Appellants were arraigned before a Magistrate Court in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja sitting at Jabi for offences of Criminal breach of trust and cheating contrary to sections 312 and 322 of the Penal Code. The prosecution called three witnesses at the end of whose evidence a no case submission was made by counsel on behalf of the Appellants. The submission was overruled by the trial court. Being dissatisfied, the Accused appealed to the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja whereat their appeals were allowed. They were also discharged. Not satisfied by the High Court decision, the Respondent herein appealed to the Court of Appeal hereinafter referred to as the court below, in allowing the appeals, the court below see pages 133 – 134 of the records of the instant appeals, held thus:

‘In fact the more considered from the summation of the Appellate High Court the evidence proffered the more inclined I am of the need to have the version of the respondents stated so that their side of the story and allegations are equally considered and evaluated. What I am trying to put across is that the prosecution threw up questions which deserve answers from the Respondents and that cannot be wished away. That is, clearly a prima facie case was made out as rightly found by the trial magistrate and I see no foundation on which the High court in its appellate jurisdiction could and did rule otherwise. I place reliance on Aminu v State (2005) All FWLR (pt. 224) 936; Ubantu v COP (2000) FWLR (pt.1) 138; Ajidagba v I.G.P. (1958) 3 FSC 5; Duru v Nwosu (1989) 1 NWLR (pt. 113) 24; Ibeziako v COP (1963)1 SCNLR 99.

‘On the above stated this appeal is meritorious and I allow it. I set aside the judgment and orders of the High court of the FCT in its appellate jurisdiction of 23/10/07. This case is to be sent back to the trial Magistrate of Jabi to conclude the proceedings.’

The two appeals under consideration are against the foregoing decision. Each Appellant has distilled a lone and not dissimilar issue for the determination of his/her appeals in his/her brief of argument filed on 3/6/10 and 20/5/10 respectively. In Appeal No. SC.109/2010, the Appellant, Michael Uzoagba, has distilled the following issue as arising for the determination of his appeal.

‘Whether the court below was right to have held that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the 1st Appellant which deserves explanation from the 1st Appellant.’

The issue proposed in Caroline Michaels brief for the determination of her Appeal No. SC.109A/2010 reads:-

‘Whether having regard to the evidence adduced the lower court was right in holding that a prima facie case of criminal breach of trust and cheating has been established against the 2nd Appellant ‘

In addition to adopting the issues formulated in the Appellants brief for the determination of the respective Appeals, the Respondent has distilled a second issue he considers equally important for the determination of the Appeals. The further issue reads:-

“Whether the state is precluded from prosecuting a Criminal matter which emanated from a transaction which is purely contractual and civil in nature.’

It is an elementary principle that issues for the determination of appeals must not only draw from the grounds of appeal in the Appellants Notice, the issues must also relate to the decision appealed against. Where an issue proposed for the determination of an appeal does not relate or attack the decision appealed against, it must, being incompetent, necessarily be discountenanced.

The identical grounds in each of the Notices of the Appellants herein are hereunder reproduced for ease of reference.

‘GROUNDS OF APPEAL