For a conviction for the charge of armed robbery to creditably be sustained, the prosecution is equally required to prove beyond reasonable doubt the following ingredients: (i) That there was a robbery or series of robberies; (ii) That the robbery was armed robbery; and (iii) That the Defendant participated in the said armed robbery.
– Saulawa, JSC. Makanjuola v. State (2021)
SHARE ON
There are three essential ingredients to be proved by the prosecution. They are set out below: a. That there was robbery; b. That the robber or robbers were armed with offensive weapons; c. That the accused person(s) was the robber or one of the robbers.
– Ogunwumiju JCA. Okeke v. State (2016)
Armed robbery is an aggravated form of robbery and the offence of robbery can be committed without the use of arms. The offence of robbery is theft or extortion by force or fear of force. See: Kerenku v. Tiv N.A. (1965) All NLR 570 at 571.
— K.M. Aka’ahs JSC. Israel Pius V. The State (SC.299/2012, 6 Mar 2015)
To secure conviction for the offence of robbery against the appellant, the prosecution must prove: 6 (1) The occurrence of the robbery. (2) The participation of the appellant in the said robbery and (3) That at the material time, the robbery was being committed, the appellant was either armed with firearms or offensive weapon or that he was in company of a person who was so armed EKE V. STATE (2011) LPELR-1133 (SC) and LEGI MOHAMMED V. STATE LPELR-46420.
— M.D. Muhammad, JSC. Friday Charles v. The State of Lagos (SC.CR/503/2020, Friday March 31 2023)
Afterall, the charge of armed robbery is not at large, it must be related to a specific incident and date.
– H.M. Ogunwumiju, JSC. State v. Ibrahim (2021) – SC.200/2016
In my considered view the report of stealing made by the PW.1 which was accompanied with actual violence and shooting of gun to overcome any resistance to the PW1’s handbag being stolen, snatched or retained by the assailant is consistent with armed robbery. I hold therefore that the Court below was not wrong when in its judgment particularly the portion at page 179 of the Record, it affirmed the trial Court’s finding, relying on the PW.1’s evidence, that there was a robbery.
— E. Eko, JSC. Kekong v State (2017) – SC.884/2014
The law is very clear that in a charge of armed robbery, the prosecution must prove that:- There was robbery or series of robberies. That the robbery or each robbery was an armed robbery. That the accused was one of those who took part in the armed robbery. See Afolalu v The State (2010) 16 NWLR (pt 1220) page 584, Ikaria v The State (2014) 1 NWLR (pt 1389) 639, Agugua v The State (2017) LPELR – 42021 (SC).
— J.I. Okoro, JSC. Chibuike Ofordike V. The State (SC.695/2016, 2019)
Click the icons to like, follow, and join JPoetry