₦airaland Forum

The Thief You Beat Today Can Sue You Tomorrow
Imagine this:
You catch someone stealing your phone. Angry, you and a few bystanders beat him until he suffers serious injuries. Everyone cheers because “he deserved it.”
A week later, you’re served with court papers.
Can the thief really sue you?
The answer is Yes.

The fact that a person committed theft does not strip them of their legal rights. The law punishes crime, but it also protects every person including suspects and convicted criminals from unlawful assault.

Why?

Under Nigerian law, criminal liability and civil liability are separate issues.

The thief may be prosecuted for stealing.

At the same time, the person who assaulted the thief may be:

1. Criminally liable for assault, causing grievous harm, or even homicide if the victim dies.
2. Civilly liable for damages for the injuries inflicted.

But can you use force?

Yes but only reasonable force.

The law recognizes situations where force may be used, such as:

1. Self-defence.
2. Defence of another person.
3. Preventing a crime.
4. Making a lawful arrest.

However, the force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the circumstances. Once the threat has ended or the suspect has been subdued, continuing to beat them is no longer justified.

A practical example
A man snatches your laptop and runs.
You chase him, catch him, and recover the laptop.
If he is restrained and no longer resisting, repeatedly beating him with sticks or kicking him may expose you to criminal charges and a civil lawsuit, despite the fact that he committed theft.

In the Case of Ezeigbo vs Ansco Inv. Ltd (2022) 8 NWLR (Pt.1832) 367 @ Ratio 1

"the Court reaffirmed that no person or authority in Nigeria may subject another to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment.

Constitutional rights do not disappear because a person is accused of a crime."

Conclusion
A thief should answer for theft.

You should not answer for assault.
Justice is administered by the courts not by mob action.

Know the law. Stay within it.

This article is for legal education only and does not constitute legal advice.
#TejiriLegalNotes #NigerianLaw

That Cheap Deal Could Cost You Your Freedom

Understanding the Offence of Receiving Stolen Property in Nigeria

Imagine buying a phone at an unbelievably cheap price, only to discover later that it was stolen. You may never have met the thief, but under Nigerian law, that bargain could expose you to criminal liability.

Many people believe that criminal liability attaches only to the person who actually steals property. The law, however, takes a broader view. A person who knowingly receives, keeps, or assists in concealing stolen property may be just as guilty as the thief.

This offence exists because thieves often rely on others to dispose of stolen items. Without willing buyers or receivers, theft becomes far less profitable. The law therefore punishes not only the act of stealing but also the act of benefiting from stolen property.

What is Receiving Stolen Property?

Receiving stolen property is committed where a person dishonestly receives or retains property that has been stolen, knowing or having reason to believe that it is stolen.

Under Section 427 of the Criminal Code Act, any person who receives property knowing it to have been stolen, or having reason to believe that it was stolen, commits an offence. Upon conviction, the offender is liable to the punishment prescribed under the Criminal Code for the offence of receiving stolen property.

In Ayodele v. State (2024) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1962) 495 @Ratio 1, the Supreme Court restated the essential ingredients that the prosecution must establish:

A. There must be proof that the goods in question were stolen;

B. There must be proof that the accused dishonestly received the said goods; and

C. There must be evidence of guilty knowledge, showing that at the time the goods were received, the accused knew or had reason to believe that they were stolen.

The burden remains on the prosecution to prove these elements beyond reasonable doubt, in accordance with Section 36(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and Sections 135–140 of the Evidence Act 2011.

Knowledge Is the Key

The offence is not established merely because someone is found in possession of stolen property. The critical question is whether the accused knew, or the surrounding circumstances were such that a reasonable person would believe, the property was stolen.

The phrase “having reason to believe” does not require direct evidence that the accused was expressly told the property was stolen. Rather, the court may infer guilty knowledge from surrounding facts and circumstances that would make an honest and reasonable person suspicious.

For example:

1. Buying a brand-new iPhone worth ₦2,000,000 for ₦150,000 in a dark alley without any receipt or reasonable explanation.
2. Purchasing expensive electronics from a person who cannot satisfactorily explain ownership.
3. Removing serial numbers from property or assisting another person to conceal suspicious goods.

These circumstances may permit a court to infer guilty knowledge, depending on the evidence before it.

Receiving Is Different from Stealing

Although the offences are related, they are legally distinct.

A thief unlawfully takes another person’s property. A receiver, on the other hand, becomes involved only after the theft has already occurred by knowingly accepting, retaining, or dealing with the stolen property.

Ordinarily, a person cannot be convicted both as the thief and as the receiver of the very same property because one cannot receive property from oneself.

Possible Defence

A genuine defence may arise where the accused honestly believed that the property lawfully belonged to the seller.

For instance, where the property was purchased openly, at its market value, with proper documentation, and there were no suspicious circumstances surrounding the transaction, the prosecution may find it difficult to prove the necessary guilty knowledge required for a conviction.

Practical Lesson

Whenever you intend to purchase valuable property:

1. Request proof of ownership.
2. Obtain a receipt or other documentary evidence of the transaction.
3. Be cautious of prices that are unrealistically low.
4. Avoid transactions conducted in secret or under suspicious circumstances.

The law does not expect every buyer to be an investigator, but it does expect every buyer to exercise reasonable caution.

Conclusion

Receiving stolen property is more than simply possessing stolen goods. The prosecution must prove that the accused knowingly or dishonestly received property that had already been stolen and that the necessary guilty knowledge existed at the time of receipt.

While the thief commits the original offence, the receiver sustains the market for stolen goods by providing an outlet through which stolen property can be disposed of. For this reason, Nigerian criminal law treats both offences with equal seriousness.

A bargain that appears too good to be true may ultimately cost far more than money it may cost one’s liberty.

Legal Authorities

1. Section 427, Criminal Code Act.
2. Section 36(5), Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).
3. Sections 135–140, Evidence Act 2011.
4. Ayodele v. State (2024) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1962) 495 @Ratio 1.


Tejiri Legal Notes

Making Nigerian law simple, practical, and accessible.

“The law is best understood when it is clearly explained.”