Rape: Evidence requires corroboration on each case – Appeal court

The accused/appellant was arraigned before the Court below on a charge which read as follows:-“CHARGEThat you Mashood Ahmed on or about the 16th day of November, 2013 at about 1700 hours at Sokoto Guest Inn Quarters of Wamakko Local Government Area of Sokoto State in Sokoto Judicial Division committed the offence of rape to wit: […]

The accused/appellant was arraigned before the Court below on a charge which read as follows:-
“CHARGE
That you Mashood Ahmed on or about the 16th day of November, 2013 at about 1700 hours at Sokoto Guest Inn Quarters of Wamakko Local Government Area of Sokoto State in Sokoto Judicial Division committed the offence of rape to wit: you forcefully dragged one Hamida Aliyu aged 13 into the bathroom and raped her and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 283 of the Penal Code.”
The charge was read and explained to the accused who pleaded not guilty. The prosecution then called witness who gave evidence in support of prosecution’s case. The accused later gave evidence in his own defence. The Lower Court, after hearing both sides, held that the prosecution had proved its case and sentenced the accused to a term of 6 years imprisonment with effect from 18/11/2013 when he was first remanded in custody.
Dissatisfied with the decision of the Lower Court, the accused now appellant filed Notice of Appeal containing 2 grounds of appeal.
For clarity’s sake I shall recapture the two issues hereunder.
ISSUE 1
Whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt as held by the learned Judge.
ISSUE 2
Whether the trial Judge had sufficiently considered the defence of the appellant.
I shall consider the two issues together.
The appellant as aforestated was the accused in suit No. SS/64C/2013. He was charged with an offence of rape contrary to Section 283 of the Penal Code.
What is rape under Section 283 of the Penal Code? In EZIGBO v THE STATE (2012) LPELR-SC 35/2010, Onnoghen JSC, explained thus:-
“It is settled law that for the prosecution to sustain a conviction against the appellant under Section 283 of the Penal Code, the following ingredients of the offence must be established by evidence
 (1) That the accused had sexual intercourse with the woman in question.
 (2) That the act was done in the circumstance envisaged in any of the five paragraphs of section 282(1) of the Penal Code.
 (3) That the woman was not the wife of the accused or if she was the wife, she had not attained puberty
 (4) That there was penetration”
In IKO v THE STATE (2001) 14 NWLR (PT.732) 221 at 245, Kalgo JSC stated, on the essential ingredients of rape thus
“The essential and most important ingredient of the offence of rape is penetration and unless penetration is proved, the prosecution must fail (See R v HILL I East P. C. 439). But penetration however slight is sufficient and it is not necessary to prove any injury or the rupture of the hymen to constitute the crime of rape (See R v ALLEN 9C & P31. See also OKOYOMON v THE STATE (1972) 1 NMLR 292; (1972) 1 SC 21 at 33; JOS N.A. POLICE v. ALLAH N.A. GANI (1986) NMLR 8; IGBINE v THE STATE (1997) 9 NWLR (PT 519) 101.”
I shall view this appeal in the light of the above.
Now, the prosecutrix in the court below gave evidence that the accused entered his penis into her vagina. She said thus:
“He removed my trouser. I used my hijab to cover my private part. He fell me on the ground he removed my hijab from my private part. He removed his trouser and entered his penis into my vagina. He was called by somebody twice through the phone. He lay on top of me and inserted his penis inside my vagina.”
The learned trial Judge who saw her and watched her demeanour believed her and accepted her evidence as true. His lordship said:
“PW1 was 13 years and 4months old when she gave evidence. Having watched her demeanor her credibility and veracity are not in doubt.”
It is necessary to find corroboration for her evidence. What nature of evidence could constitute corroboration for the evidence of the prosecutrix? This was considered by Adekeye JSC. in POSU & 1 OR v THE STATE (2011) 3 NWLR 393 where her lordship stated thus:
“The nature of the corroboration must depend on the peculiar facts of each case. Where rape is denied by the accused, the evidence of corroboration that the court must look for is for instance:
 (a) Medical evidence showing injury to the private part or to other parts of her body which may have been occasioned in a struggle
 (b) Semen stains on her clothes or the clothes of the accused or on the place where the offence is alleged to have been committed.”
There was evidence of the torn trousers of the prosecutrix. There was the evidence of the dirty hijab. There was the medical report of the damaged hymen (Exhibit E) and there was the evidence of PW2 and PW4 that the prosecutrix could not walk properly after the incident.
PW7, Dr Bello Abubakar Ibrahim was the medical doctor who gave evidence. e.
For clarity’s sake, I hereby quote hereunder the content of the said Exhibit E, the medical report:
“RE: HAMIDA ALIYU, HOSP. NO 27705
The above named was brought to this Unit on the 16th of November, 2013 on alleged rape case. Said to have been raped by one Mashud Ahmed
who lived in the same compound and had sexual intercourse with her in the toilet.
Examination finding revealed: a young girl, anxious looking, not pale. Vaginal examination was done: Normal Vulva and Vagina. Hymen was disrupted. No bleeding, nil bruiser.
Gloved finger stained with whitish substances. Assessment of suspect rape was made.
Some of the drugs prescribed include Amoxyl, postinor and was asked to do RVS, Pregnancy test, HIV for M/C/S.

To be continued