Automated Summary
Key Facts
The appellant was convicted of rape for having sexual intercourse with a 12-year-old girl in 2018. The conviction was overturned on appeal due to the invalidation of the victim's testimony, as the trial court failed to require her to promise to tell the truth under section 127(2) of the Evidence Act. The court found the rest of the prosecution's evidence insufficient without the victim's valid testimony.
Issues
The court examined whether the trial court's failure to ensure a child witness (PW2) promised to tell the truth before testifying under section 127(2) of the Evidence Act invalidated her evidence. This procedural flaw led to the conclusion that her testimony, and consequently the prosecution's case, was legally unsound.
Holdings
The court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and set aside the 30-year imprisonment sentence. The decision was based on the trial court's failure to properly administer the promise required by section 127(2) of the Evidence Act for a child witness (PW2), rendering her testimony invalid. This invalidated the prosecution's case, as the victim's testimony was critical to establishing the rape charge.
Remedies
- The court ordered the immediate release of the appellant unless held for other lawful reasons, following the quashing of conviction and sentence.
- The thirty-year imprisonment sentence was set aside as the conviction could not be sustained due to invalid victim evidence.
- The court allowed the appeal, quashing the conviction and setting aside the sentence imposed against the appellant.
- The conviction of the appellant was quashed due to invalid evidence from the victim, as the trial court failed to properly administer the required promise to tell the truth from the child witness.
Legal Principles
The court held that evidence from a child witness (PW2) was invalid due to non-compliance with section 127(2) of the Evidence Act, which requires a child of tender age to promise to tell the truth before testifying. This procedural failure rendered the victim's testimony inadmissible, leading to the overturning of the conviction.
Precedent Name
- Bashiru Salum Sudi Vs R
- Godfrey Wilson Vs. R
Cited Statute
- Written Laws (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act, No. 4 of 2016
- Penal Code, Chapter 16 R.E 2002
- Evidence Act as amended by the Written Laws (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act, No. 4 of 2016
Judge Name
Justice MANSOOR
Passage Text
- It is a settled principle of law that the best evidence to establish rape is of the victim herself. Since the crucial evidence of PW2, the victim, is invalid then it follows that the rest of the prosecution's evidence, that is PW1, PW3, PW4 and PW5 are worthless, this being the case, then conviction by trial court cannot be sustained.
- Then it follows also in this case that, since the trial magistrate failed to comply with the mandatory requirement of S. 127(2) of the Evidence Act as amended by the Written Laws (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act, No. 4 of 2016 in taking the testimonies of PW2, this Court finds that, the same has no evidential value, thus invalid.