Facts
This appeal arose from a judgement of the Court of Appeal, wherein the acquittal of the Appellant and the 2nd and 3rd Respondents was set aside, and the matter remitted for retrial before a different Judge.
The 2nd and 3rd Respondents and the nominal complainant (PW 1) are Chinese nationals, directors and shareholders of BN Ceramics Industry Nigeria Limited, while the Appellant was the Company Secretary. Following a special resolution reached at an extra-ordinary general meeting of the company, its share capital was increased from ten million (10,000,000) to twenty million (20,000,000). Further, by a letter titled Relinquishment of Shares, allegedly signed by PW 1, he purportedly relinquished 3,760,000 ordinary shares to the company for proper re-allotment. Another special resolution was reached at the company’s extra-ordinary general meeting, where the shareholding of the company was re-allotted, with PW 1 left with only 1,880,000 shares. PW 1. Who denied being informed about the meetings and signing the letter of relinquishment of shares, instructed his solicitor to write a petition to the Police.
The police carried out its investigation, leading to the filing of a 13-count charge against the Appellant and the 2nd and 3rd Respondents at the Federal High Court, Abuja. The charge was amended to 15-counts bordering on offences of conspiracy, forgery, uttering false documents, and money laundering. The accused persons pleaded not guilty. At trial, the prosecution called five witnesses, including a forensic document examiner and handwriting expert, and tendered several exhibits. The case of the 1st Respondent was that the Appellant, 2nd and 3rd Respondents conspired to make use of forged documents to cheat PW 1 out of the company, gained access to the company’s accounts and made several questionable transfers to offshore accounts. Under cross-examination, PW 1 stated that he was not sure who forged his signature but suggested that it might have been one of the Defendants, while PW5 testified that the disputed signature did not belong to PW1 or any of the Defendants. Upon the close of the prosecution’s case, the Defendants entered a no-case submission. The trial court dismissed counts 6–15 on this basis, but retained counts 1–5, which related to conspiracy, forgery, and uttering false documents. In their defence, the Defendants denied any involvement in the alleged forgery. The Appellant explained that as the Company Secretary, he merely processed and filed documents with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) upon instruction of the 3rd Respondent who was the Managing Director. He testified that he used a contact named Ugolo Johnson to obtain and submit the forms at CAC, and sent the forms to a person called Roy (an administrative office of the company) to take to the directors for their signature. The Defendants also maintained that PW 1 had been notified of the meetings via telephone and e-mail but chose not to attend the meetings.
In its judgement, the trial court held that although the relinquishment letter was forged, the prosecution failed to link the forgery to any of the Defendants. The court held further that no proof of conspiracy or uttering of false documents and noted that the failure to call key witnesses, such as Roy and Ugolo Johnson, the CAC filing agent, was fatal to the prosecution’s case. The Defendants were accordingly acquitted and discharged.
Dissatisfied, the prosecution appealed to the Court of Appeal. The appellate court held that the documents were indeed forged and reasoned that those who benefited from the forged documents could be inferred to be the masterminds. It concluded that the trial court inadequately evaluated the evidence, allowed the appeal, set aside the acquittal, and remitted the matter for retrial before a different Judge. Displeased with the judgement of the Court of Appeal, the Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.
