3
one that tells a lie about itself and document made with intent to defraud. The following
are the elements of forgery: (a)
That there is a document in writing
(b)
That the document or writing is forged
(c )
That the forgery is from the accused person
(d)
That the accused person knows that the document or writing is false
(e)
That the accused intends that the forged document be acted upon to the prejudice
of the victim in the belief that it is genuine.
The prosecution Counsel submitted that a document is said to be forged, if the
whole or part of it is made by a person with all falsity and knowledge and with the
intention that it may be acted upon as genuine to the prejudice of the victim. See the
following cases: (a)
ALAKE VS STATE (1991) 7 NWLR (PART 205) 56 AT 59 PARAGRAPHS A –
C.
(b)
OSONDU VS FRN (2000) 12 NWLR (PART 682) 483 AT 504 PARAGRAPH A.
The prosecution Counsel’s submission with regard to the present case in line with
the above cited authorities is that, PW1 – 3 in their evidences before this Court, testified
to the uncontradicted facts that the accused person presented to the EFCC, a University of
Ilorin Certificate/Statement of Result showing that he graduated with a second class
lower Division based on which he was employed, whereas investigation by PW1 clearly
revealed that the accused person graduated with a Third Class Degree in Business
Administration. Exhibits A, B and F are tendered before the Court and admitted in
evidence. The prosecution Counsel argued that the exhibits are correspondences between
the EFCC and the University of Ilorin stating clearly that the accused graduated with a
Third Class Degree.
The prosecution Counsel postulates that Exhibit F is a letter
received from the university, annexed to which are copies of the Order of convocation
proceedings and transcript of the accused person, which are all consistent that the accused