Ondo CJ frees convict

An Akure High Court presided over by the Chief Judge (CJ) of Ondo State, Justice O.O. Akeredolu, has set aside the judgment of the Chief Magistrates’ Court delivered by Magistrate C.O. Kuye, on October 21, 2016.

The court sentenced the appellant, Mrs. Oyelade Olasunkanmi, to two years’ imprisonment without an option of fine over offence of forgery of an agreement for sale of land between Isaac Babalola and the late Olasunkanmi Oyelade.

This, according to law, was contrary to Section 465 of the Criminal Code Cap. 37 Vol. 1, Laws of Ondo State of Nigeria, 2006. The appellant, although earlier was granted amnesty, was dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial court.

She caused her counsel to file a notice of appeal dated October 28, 2016 against the decision of the trial court on four grounds of appeal, which bordered on error of law and misdirection.

Parties thereafter applied to court to file their written briefs and the appellant, through her counsel, led by A. A. Ojopagogo Esq., argued that the trial court did not properly evaluate the case/evidence before concluding that the prosecution had proven the offence of forgery beyond reasonable doubt.

He said the original document, which was allegedly forged, was not before the trial court.

The counsel argued that the prosecution was unable to ascertain who actually altered the agreement in question.

Consequently, counsel to the appellant sought an order to allow her appeal and set aside the judgment of the lower court, which convicted the appellant.

He also sought an order to discharge and acquit the appellant of the forgery offence.

The respondent’s counsel from the Ministry of Justice filed his brief dated September 19, wherein he formulated an issue to wit: whether from the totality of the evidence before the trial court, the prosecution proved the charge of forgery by alteration against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

The court, having reviewed the case before it, held that “it is required in a case of forgery that the original document and the forged document must be before the court.”

Also, it averred that the burden of a crime should be on the prosecution, which it failed to prove either by direct or circumstantial evidence that it was the appellant that forged the document in question.

Giving judgement, the CJ upturned the lower court, discharged and acquitted the appellant.

(FNTV)