THE STATE v. MAILUMBO ADAMU
(2014)LCN/6878(CA)
RATIO
CRIMINAL LAW: IN WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD THE DEFENCE OF SELF-DEFENCE AVAIL AN ACCUSED PERSON
The defence of self-defence will avail an accused person only if he can show that he was in reasonable apprehension of death or grievous harm and if the means of retaliation is not disproportionate in the circumstances. See OGBA v. STATE (1990) 3 NWLR (Pt. 139) 505 at 518, NJOKU v. STATE (supra) and KWAGHSHIR v. STATE (supra). The issue of proportionality of initial attack and the retaliation that caused death can be decided by the instrument or means of attack and the one used in the retaliation as well the part of the body attacked and that upon which retaliation was inflicted.
Every case must be decided on the totality of evidence before the court. If the evidence is so strong against an accused as to leave only a remote possibility in his favour which can be dismissed with the sentence “of course it is possible and probable,” then guilt would successfully have been proved beyond reasonable doubt. The sort of doubt intended to be given to an accused must be one that the ordinary man will not ignore as negligible but take into account and weigh when considering a situation in the conduct of his affairs. Per ABUBAKAR BABANDI GUMEL, J.C.A
