site logo
Skip to case content
Case Digest

P. C. IMO AKPAKPAN V. THE STATE (2022)

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Coram
  • Mary U. Peter-Odili JSC
  • Kudrat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun JSC
  • John Inyang Okoro JSC
  • Adamu Jauro JSC
  • Akomaye Agim JSC
Parties

Appellant:

  • P. C. Imo Akpakpan

Respondent:

  • The State
Suit number
SC. 1092/2017
Delivered on

Background

This case stems from the tragic incident on August 5, 2010, involving the appellant, P. C. Imo Akpakpan, a police constable, who was part of a patrol team engaged in a stop-and-search operation. During this operation, the deceased, Idongesit Okon Tom, was stopped for failing to produce the particulars of his motorcycle. Following an altercation, the appellant shot the deceased, resulting in his death two weeks later in the hospital.

Issues

The primary issues raised in this case included:

  1. Whether the defence of accident raised by the appellant was adequately considered by the courts.
  2. Whether there was a miscarriage of justice when the Court of Appeal substituted the trial court's life sentence with a death sentence for murder.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the burden of proof lies upon the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The court reiterated essential elements of murder, namely, the deceased's death, causation by the appellant, and the intent behind the act.

Court Findings

The court found that:

  1. The appellant's action in shooting the deceased demonstrated intent to inflict harm, thereby supporting a murder conviction.
  2. The appellate court's dismissal of the accident defense was justified as the act was deliberate, and the appellant's testimony was inconsistent with his prior statements.
  3. The substitution of a life sentence with death was appropriate, as the trial court had misapplied the legal standards concerning the sentencing for murder.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal's decision, emphasizing the importance of evaluating evidence and the clarity of the appellant's intent in the act that led to the deceased's death.

Significance

This case highlights critical aspects of criminal law regarding the burden of proof, the evaluation of evidence, and the definitions of intent in the context of murder. It reinforces the notion that a defence of accident cannot override deliberate criminal acts.

Counsel:

  • Lawrence S. Oko-Jaja Esq.
  • Joseph Umoren Esq.