COURT DISCHARGES MAN ACCUSED OF ARMED ROBBERY IN ADAMAWA

Suleiman Ibrahim and his Counsel, Mohammed Abubakar Esq

Adamawa State High Court of Justice presided by the Chief Judge, Hon. Justice Hafsat Abdulrahman has discharged and acquitted a motorcycle mechanic, Suleiman Ibrahim, accused of armed robbery.

Justice Hafsat discharged and acquitted Suleiman after he was tried and found not guilty on a one count charge of armed robbery contrary to Section 2 of the Robbery and Fire Arms (Special Provisions) Act.

The 30 years old Suleiman who hails from Gyawana community in Lamurde Local Government Area of Adamawa State, spent 7 years in prison custody for the alleged crime before he was discharged and acquitted on the 2nd November, 2023.

He was accused of robbing one Mr. Samson Bernard of his day's job money as well as Techno handset valued N7,000 at Gokombo village in Lamurde LGA on the 22nd of April, 2017.

Suleiman, who was arraigned on the 30th of July, 2018, pleaded not guilty to the alleged offence when the case was mentioned. 

In a bid to prove its case, the Prosecution called 2 witnesses who testified as PW1 and PW2, while the Defendant testified for himself as DW1 after which both Prosecution and the Defence closed their cases and adopted their final written addresses.

Earlier, under cross examination by the Defence Counsel; Mohammed Abubakar Esq, Assistant Chief Legal Aid Officer, Legal Aid Council, the alleged victim, Mr. Samson Bernard, who testified as PW2, contradicted himself in his testimony as to the specific time the robbery incident occurred. 

Furthermore, while he affirmed in his testimony that he used his motorcycle's light to flash and identify the Defendant on the road, he contradicted himself when confronted with his statement to the Police where he clearly stated that his motorcycle does not have light. 

He again stated that he has a reason why he told the Police that his motorcycle does not have light, thereby contradicting himself by saying that his motorcycle has light.

While delivering judgement, Justice Hafsat held that the testimonies of PW1 and PW2 did not link the Defendant with the alleged crime, saying "There was no iota of evidence linking the Defendant with the offence of armed robbery or assault or of causing hurt".

She said, "It is trite that the Court is at liberty to reject the testimony of a witness who contradicts himself as the Court cannot choose which part of the testimony to believe and which not to believe. "I accordingly in that light hold that the testimony of PW2 being contradictory is hereby discountenanced"

She declared that based on the testimonies of the witnesses, it is unfortunate that none has linked the Defendant with the alleged crime, saying that the Prosecution has failed woefully to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt as the absence of the testimony of PW2's uncle to say the least, is fatal to the Prosecution's case.

Justice Hafsat stated that the inability of PW2 to identify the Defendant herein as one of those that attacked him resulted in his inability to link the Defendant with the alleged armed robbery or any other offence of assault or hurt as the Prosecution Counsel laboured to establish, in lieu of the armed robbery charge.

The Court had earlier rejected the extra judicial statement of the Defendant after a trial within trial was conducted. The Court held that the Prosecution has failed to prove that the statement was voluntarily obtained from the Defendant. 

Counsel to the Defendant; Mohammed Abubakar Esq of the Legal Aid Council, Adamawa State office and the Prosecuting Counsel N. J. Atiku Esq. appreciated the Court for the judgment.