AMINA ADAMU AUGIE, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The Appellant, an apprentice, and his Master, Emeka Mba, were arraigned before an Anambra State High Court and charged with murder of Emeka Nnadozie [deceased]. The Appellant allegedly hit the deceased on the head with a “cement baluster while the deceased was fighting with his Master over a debt of N4, 000.00.
After a trial in which the Prosecution called three Witnesses, and the Defendants testified in their own defence, the trial Court found the Appellant’s Master, who was first Defendant, not guilty and discharged and acquitted him. But the Appellant was found guilty as charged, and he was convicted and sentenced to death.
The Appellant’s Appeal to Court of Appeal was dismissed. He appealed to this Court with a Notice of Appeal that contains four Grounds of Appeal, and he has formulated two Issues for Determination in his Brief of Argument, which the Respondent adopted in its own Brief of Argument, and the said Issues are:
1. Whether the Prosecution had satisfactorily proved the ingredients of Murder as to make it safe for the Court to convict the Appellant as charged?
2. Alternatively, whether from the oral and documentary evidence adduced by both Parties, the Appellant is not entitled to the defence of provocation?
As the Parties rightly submitted, the Prosecution must prove the three elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, that is: that the deceased died; that the death of the deceased was caused by the Accused; and that the Accused intended to either kill or cause the deceased grievous bodily harm. See
…………………….B…………………….
Adava V. State (2006) 9 NWLR (Pt. 984) 152, cited by the Appellant, and Omotayo V. State (2013) 2 NWLR (Pt. 1338) 235 and Tegwonor V. State (2008) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1069) 630, cited by the Respondent.
The said three elements of the offence must co-exist at the same time, if not, the Accused is entitled to be acquitted of the offence – see Asuquo V. State (2016) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1532) 309. In this case, that the deceased died is not in doubt; the hanging question is whether it was the Appellant that caused his death.
