LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW – Defence of Alibi – Cogent Prosecution Evidence Fixing Accused at Scene Defeats Alibi
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where an accused raises alibi promptly with necessary particulars, the prosecution has a duty to investigate it. However, where the prosecution adduces cogent evidence of the physical presence of the accused at the scene, the prosecution is relieved of calling further evidence to destroy the alibi.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Wali, JSC, in Bashaya v. State (1998) NLC-1151996(SC) at pp. 18–19; Paras D–A.
"It is well established principle of law that where an accused person raised the defence of alibi promptly with the necessary particulars of his whereabout, the prosecution has a duty to investigate it… But where the prosecution adduced cogent evidence of the physical presence of the accused at the scene of the crime, the prosecution is relieved of calling any further evidence to destroy the alibi raised."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Cogent evidence of presence defeats alibi. The prosecution need not investigate the alibi if it has direct evidence. The principle applies to criminal trials. The court will accept the eyewitness evidence. The accused’s alibi is demolished by positive identification. The rule balances the prosecution’s duty with practical realities. The alibi must be considered alongside all evidence. The trial court must evaluate both. The prosecution bears the ultimate burden of proof.
