- OBTAINING BY FALSE PRETENCE
- ELEMENTS OF OBTAINING BY FALSE PRETENCE
Obtaining by False Pretence
Obtaining by false pretence refers to the act of dishonestly obtaining something of value, whether money, property, or services, by making false representations or promises with the intent to deceive the victim. See section 1 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act (2006) which provides that "Any person who by any false pretence, and with intent to defraud, obtains from any other person, in Nigeria or in any other country, for himself or any other person, any property, whether or not the property is obtained or its delivery is induced through the medium of a contract induced by false pretence, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term of not more than 20 years and not less than 7 years without the option of a fine." and also section 419 (1) which provides that "Any person who by any false pretence, and with intent to defraud, obtains from any other person anything capable of being stolen, or induces any other person to deliver to any person anything capable of being stolen, is guilty of a felony, and is liable to imprisonment for three years." and see also the case of State v. Ezeji (2002) 1 NWLR (Pt. 749) 662, where the court found the accused guilty of obtaining money by false pretence under Section 419 of the Criminal Code.
Elements of Obtaining by False Pretence
To establish the offence of obtaining by false pretence, the prosecution must prove the following elements:
1. False Representation: The accused must have made a representation that is false. This can be in the form of statements or conduct. The false representation must relate to a past or present fact. A mere promise about future conduct does not constitute false pretence unless it is accompanied by a false representation of a present or past fact. See the case of Okujagu v. State (2013) LPELR-20745(SC), where the Supreme Court of Nigeria held that the false representation must be of an existing fact and not a future promise.
2. Knowledge of Falsity: The accused must know that the representation is false or must be reckless as to whether it is true or false. See the case of Emenalo v. State (2015) LPELR-24477(CA), where it was held that for the offence to be established, it must be shown that the accused had knowledge of the falsity of the representation or was reckless as to whether it was true or false.
3. Intention to Defraud: The false representation must have been made with the intent to defraud the victim. This means that the accused must have intended to deceive the victim and induce them to part with their property or money. See the case of Akinola v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2012) LPELR-7907(CA) where the court emphasized that intent to defraud is a crucial element that must be proven for the offence to be established.
4. Reliance and Deception: The victim must have relied on the false representation, and as a result, been deceived into parting with their property, money, or any other valuable thing. See the case of Sule v. State (2009) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1169) 33, where the court ruled that there must be evidence that the victim was actually deceived by the false representation and relied on it to their detriment.
5. Obtaining Property or Value: The accused must have obtained something of value as a result of the false representation. This can include money, property, or services. See the case of Jimoh v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2007) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1054) 107, where the court held that the prosecution must prove that the accused obtained something of value from the victim as a result of the false pretence.
Examples and Illustrations:
1. If an individual falsely claims to be a government official and induces a company to pay for a non-existent contract, this would constitute obtaining by false pretence.
2. If someone sells a piece of land using forged documents and falsely represents that they own the land, they can be charged with obtaining by false pretence.
No comments:
Post a Comment