A Kano State High Court has sentenced a 22-year-old man, Najibullah Alkasim, to death by hanging after finding him guilty of killing his neighbour, Isyaku Ya’u, during a quarrel that broke out at a community celebration in Dakata Quarters earlier in the year. The ruling, delivered by Justice Farida Dabappa, brought to an end a months-long trial that examined witness testimonies, forensic evidence, and the circumstances surrounding the fatal altercation.
According to the court, the incident occurred on January 19, 2024, at a party organised by residents to celebrate an election victory in the area. What began as an atmosphere of joy and festivity reportedly turned into chaos when an argument erupted between the defendant and the deceased. The disagreement quickly escalated, culminating in a violent confrontation that tragically claimed one life.
During the proceedings, the prosecution, led by Lamido Abba-Sorondinki, argued that Alkasim acted with intention and used a screwdriver to stab Ya’u in the chest. This single act, the prosecution maintained, resulted in fatal injuries that led to Ya’u’s death shortly afterwards. The court was presented with multiple pieces of evidence, including a medical report detailing the cause of death, photographs from the scene, and the screwdriver allegedly used in the attack.
In addition to physical evidence, the prosecution brought forward four witnesses who provided accounts of what they saw or knew about the events of that night. Their statements, taken alongside the forensic findings, were used to establish a clear chain of events linking the defendant to the crime. An alleged confessional statement by Alkasim was also tendered before the court, although the defence contested its validity.
Alkasim pleaded not guilty to the charge of culpable homicide, insisting that he did not commit the crime. His legal counsel, Tasiu Daneji, called three witnesses in an effort to refute the prosecution’s claims and create doubt about the defendant’s involvement. The defence argued that the evidence presented was not strong enough to justify a conviction and suggested that there were inconsistencies in parts of the prosecution’s case.
However, after carefully reviewing all the evidence and listening to the arguments from both sides, Justice Dabappa ruled that the prosecution had succeeded in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt. In her judgment, she stated that the testimonies of the witnesses were consistent and supported by the medical findings, which confirmed that the victim’s death resulted from a wound to the chest inflicted with a sharp object.
Justice Dabappa further noted that the burden placed on the prosecution in a criminal case of this nature is a heavy one, but in this instance, that burden had been adequately met. She concluded that the defendant was legally responsible for Ya’u’s death and, in accordance with the law governing culpable homicide, sentenced him to death by hanging.
The ruling has stirred a mixture of emotions in the Dakata community. For the family of Isyaku Ya’u, the judgment offers a measure of closure after a painful and tragic loss. Relatives and residents described Ya’u as a peaceful neighbour whose life was cut short during what was meant to be a joyful occasion. Although the legal process has run its course, the emotional impact of the incident continues to weigh heavily on those who knew him.
At the same time, Alkasim’s family must now face the reality of the consequences that followed a moment of violence. Some community members have expressed sorrow that a celebration meant to unite people instead ended in a tragedy that destroyed two families—one through death and the other through the certainty of a harsh sentence.
Legal observers have pointed out that cases such as this highlight the importance of peaceful conflict resolution and the dangers of allowing disagreements to escalate into violence. They also stress the need for increased awareness, especially among young people, about the irreversible consequences that can arise from momentary anger and poor judgment.
The case serves as a grim reminder of how quickly situations can spiral out of control and how a single action can permanently alter many lives. While the court’s decision has been delivered in accordance with the law, the broader community is left to reflect on the importance of restraint, communication, and respect for life.
Source:Africa Publicity
