EXTRA–JUDICIAL STATEMENT BY A PERSON NOT CALLED TO TESTIFY CANNOT BE RELIED UPON BY THE COURT
Ngorka v. A.-G., Imo State (2026) 13 NWLR (Pt. 2056) 1 at 42, B—H: ‘The law is settled beyond peradventure that the extra-judicial statement made by a potential witness and who was not called to testify in court cannot be accorded any probative or evidential value. In Okoro v. State (1998) 14 NWLR (Pt.584) 181, this court opined thus: “A written account of what was told the police during investigation is hearsay evidence where the maker of the statement was not called as a witness in court. And being hearsay evidence, it is inadmissible. It would only be admissible to contradict the maker or test his credibility if he is made a witness in the case. In the instant case, Exhibit E which was a written account of what the appellant’s wife told the police was clearly inadmissible since she was not called as a witness in the case. The admission of it by the trial court was therefore wrongful.” Thus, the contents of the extra judicial statement of Caroline Azubuike, which was part proof of evidence, but not tendered in evidence and upon which counsel to the appellant predicated his entire contention, could not form the basis of any tenable or reasonable argument either before the Court of Appeal or this court, as attempted by counsel to the appellant. It could not be used to determine whether Caroline Azubuike was a vital witness or not. So, the question of the respondent failing to call a vital witness did not arise.’