REX                                    Respondent.     

                                                                                   v.

                           JOHN ONI AKERELE                      Appellant.

pg 62

Appeal against sentence of High Court.

Appeal ageist sentence of imprisonment for manslaughter­ Held: Appeal allowed as accused did not deliberately set out to break the law or harm a fellow being. Fine substituted.

There is no need to set out the facts.

C. W. Reece for Crown.

Sir William Geary (A. Alakija, Wells-Palmer and E. A. Akerele with him) for Appellant.

The following joint judgment was delivered:-

KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA, PETRIDES, C.J., GOLD COAST, AND GRAHAM PAUL, C J, SIERRA LEONE.

The appellant was convicted in the High Court of the Man­slaughter of a child named Kalu Ibe in circumstances more fully described in the judgment of this Court upon his appeal against conviction. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment with hard labour for that offence. At the same trial he was convicted upon the same facts, of an offenee contrary to section 343 (1) (I) of the Criminal Code and sentenced to a fine of £100 or twelve months imprisonment with hard labour, the sentences to be concurrent.

In view of the provisions of section 16 of the Criminal Code the Court is of opinion that the sentence passed upon the third count after sentence had been passed upon the first count cannot be upheld, and the sentence passed upon the third count is accordingly quashed. As to the sentence upon the first count, having regard to all the circumstances of this case, more particularly to the faet that this is not a case where a man has set out deliberately to break the law or harm a fellow being, and to the case for the prosecution, as submitted to this Court, that there was only one act of criminal negligence by the appellant, namely gross carelessness in connecting too Atrong a mixture of the drug he used, this Court has come to the conclusion that it is not necessary to Bend the appellant to prison without giving him the option of paying a heavy fine.

The appeal is therefore allowed, the sentence passed at the trial upon the first count is quashed, and in substitution therefor the appellant is sentenced to a fine of £;500, or, in default of payment, to imprisonment with hard labour for twelve months.

ORDER

Appellant is to be allowed one month to pay the fine. During that period he may' be admitted to bail upon entering into a Bond for £1,000 with two Sureties of £500 each approved by the Registrar of the Court. pg 63