The Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, has set aside the conviction of Sharafadeen Irorun for obtaining by false pretence and stealing, holding that the prosecution failed to prove its case and that the trial court’s judgment was perverse.
Lagos High Court, Ikeja, had sentenced Irorun to 10 years’ imprisonment for scamming Muslim pilgrims of N7,500,000.
In a unanimous judgment delivered by the three-man panel comprising Justices Yargata Byenchit Nimpar, Danlami Zama Senchi and Abdulazeez Mohammed Anka allowed the appeal marked CA/L/CR/881/2024.
Justice Nimpar delivered the lead judgment, which nullified the April 29, 2024, decision of Justice Oyindamola Ogala of the Lagos State High Court, Ikeja, in Charge ID/4605/2017.
The lower court had discharged and acquitted him on counts 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, but convicted him on counts 1 and 5 for obtaining by false pretence and counts 2 and 6 for stealing under Sections 312 and 285(9)(b) of the Criminal Law of Lagos State 2011.
Dissatisfied, Irorun approached the appellate court through his counsel, Emeke Emedo Ananyi, arguing that the conviction was unsupported by credible evidence.
In its judgment, the Court of Appeal held that there was “no iota of evidence on count one to five” establishing that the appellant made any false representation as alleged.
The court noted that prosecution witnesses PW1 and PW2 admitted under cross-examination that they had no direct dealings with the appellant, thereby failing to establish essential elements of the offence.
On the allegation of stealing N870,000, the court found that PW2 testified he paid N800,000 to PW3 and not to the appellant.
It further observed that no bank records or documentary evidence were tendered to link Irorun to the alleged transaction.
The appellate court described the testimony of PW3 as “lengthy, conflicting, confusing and doubtful,” adding that it ultimately established nothing against the appellant.
“The judgment of the trial court was perverse. In the circumstances, this court is bound to interfere and correct the miscarriage of justice suffered by the Appellant,” the court held.
The appellate court concluded that the respondent failed to discharge the burden of proof required in criminal cases and that the trial court’s judgment lacked adequate reasoning.
Consequently, the court set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court and discharged and acquitted Irorun.
The court ordered his immediate release from custody.
In this article