GH - REX v. AKINPELU AJANI, AND OTHERS

The following judgment was delivered :KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA.

In this case the man Tiamiyu, with whom this judgment deals, was the seventh accused in the Court below and the fourth appellant before this Court. He is hereinafter referred to merely as the appellant. He was convicted in the High Court of the Ibadan Division on two counts (the first and third at the trial) and sentenced to ten years' imprisonment (presumably without hard labour) on the first count and seven years' imprisonment with hard labour on the third count, the sentences to run concurrently.

On the first count the charge was :-

" Preparation for coining: contra section 148 (3) (c) of Criminal Code."

And the particulars :-

" Akinpelu Ajani, Abolude Alamu, Adewale and Tiamiyu were, on 17th September, 1935, at sundry places in the Oyo Province, in possession of sundry moulds, tools, bellows, etc., adapted to make current Nigerian silver coins."

The prosecution led no evidence whatever, admissible against the appellant, to prove that he was in possession, actual or constructive, of any mould, tool or bellows. The nearest approach to any such evidence comes from the second witness, a native administration police constable, who says, "we searched seventh accused's house and found nothing. Before we asked (? arrested) him he admitted that Exhibit' B ' (a mould), which we had found in second accused's house, belonged to him." This alleged admission is no evidence of possession, but, even if it were, the Court made no investigation (as it should have done) into how this alleged confession came to be made, and on such a bare record it would be quite unsafe to act upon such evidence.

So far as the admissibility of evidence is concerned, throughout the trial statements made by one accused implicating others were admitted without any record being made, either at the time of admission that such 'statements were not admissible as evidence against accused who were not present, or in a summing up or judgment that the trial Judge had warned himself to disregard such statements in considering the evidence in the cases of the accused against whom they were inadmissible. This Court is of opinion that for the sake of safety and clarity it is desirable that such a note should be made in both places, though it is sufficient if the record makes it appear in one or the other that such statements were not wrongly considered. But when, as in this case, there is nothing in the record to make it so appear,

The following judgment was delivered :KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA.

On the first count the charge was :-

" Preparation for coining: contra section 148 (3) (c) of Criminal Code."

And the particulars :-

REX v. AKINPELU AJANI, AND OTHERS

Areas of Law