“Now, it is well-settled that to sustain a charge of stealing against an accused person, the prosecution must prove: (a) That the thing stolen is capable of being stolen; (b) That the accused has the intention of permanently depriving the owner of the thing stolen; (c) That the accused was dishonest and (d) That the accused had unlawfully appropriated the thing stolen to his own use, Otti v. The State (1997) 1 NWLR (Pt. 207) 103, 118, Muhammed v. The State (2000) FWLR (Pt. 30) 2623, 2626. Per Nweze, JSC. at P. 5, Para. B.
CHYFRANK NIGERIA v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2019-LCER-36848-SC)
Facts
Issues
Whether the lower court, rightly, found that the respondent had established a prima facie case of stealing against the appellants.
Lead Judge(ment)
CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE, J.S.C. (Delivering the Lead Judgment):
Held
Appeal allowed.
Alternate Citations
Read Full Judgment
Counsel:
Chukwuka Ikwuazor with him, C.J. Caleb…..For Appellant
And
S.K. Atteh with him, S.T. Ola, G.C. Akaogun…..For Respondent
For Appellant(s)
For Respondent(s)
Counsel’s Photograph(s) Needed.