By Iroyin Yoruba Television
The Gombe State High Court sitting in Court No. 5 has sentenced two men, Buhari Sule and Muktari Ali Hilami, to death by hanging after finding them guilty of criminal conspiracy, armed robbery and culpable homicide in connection with the killing of a 35-year-old man.
The judgment was delivered on Wednesday, October 7, 2026, by Justice Muhammad-Auwal Haruna, who presided over the proceedings.
The two men were prosecuted over the September 18, 2025 attack on Murtala Rabi’u, a resident of Garin Galadima village near Pindiga in Akko Local Government Area of Gombe State.
According to the evidence presented during the trial, the defendants were accused of conspiring to rob Rabi’u before arming themselves with dangerous objects, including sticks and hoes, and attacking him.
The prosecution told the court that the attackers dispossessed Rabi’u of his mobile phone and ₦7,400 in cash.
The court heard that the stolen money was subsequently shared between the men after the attack.
The prosecution further established that Rabi’u sustained serious injuries during the incident and later died from the injuries.
His body was subsequently dumped in a maize farm.
The case eventually proceeded through the judicial process, with the defendants denying the allegations against them when the charges were read and explained.
The prosecution presented witnesses to establish its case, while the defence was also given an opportunity to challenge the evidence and present its own case.
Two prosecution witnesses testified during the trial and were cross-examined by the defence.
The defence subsequently called a witness who also gave evidence and faced questioning from the prosecution.
After considering the evidence from both sides, Justice Haruna ruled that the prosecution had successfully established its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The court particularly relied on the evidence of the first prosecution witness in reaching its conclusion.
The judge also held that the defence had failed to present sufficient evidence capable of discrediting the prosecution's case.
The court therefore found Buhari Sule and Muktari Ali Hilami guilty of criminal conspiracy, armed robbery and culpable homicide.
Justice Haruna consequently sentenced each of the two men to death by hanging.
The judgment brings to a close the trial arising from the death of Rabi’u, although the defendants retain the legal right to challenge the conviction and sentence through the appellate process.
The case illustrates the severe consequences Nigerian courts can impose when armed robbery is combined with the unlawful killing of a victim.
Armed robbery is treated as a serious criminal offence because it involves the use or threat of violence to obtain property from another person.
When a victim dies during such an attack, the case can additionally attract charges relating to culpable homicide or murder, depending on the circumstances established by the prosecution and the applicable law.
In this case, the Gombe State High Court found that the prosecution had proved the relevant offences beyond reasonable doubt.
The judgment also highlights the importance of evidence in criminal trials.
The defendants had pleaded not guilty, meaning that the prosecution was required to establish the allegations against them rather than relying simply on the accusations contained in the charge.
Witness testimony became an important part of the proceedings.
The court considered the testimony presented by the prosecution alongside the evidence offered by the defence before reaching its decision.
The judge's conclusion that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt provided the legal basis for the convictions.
For the family and community of Murtala Rabi’u, the judgment represents a significant development after more than a year of legal proceedings.
The original incident occurred in September 2025, but the case continued through investigation, prosecution and trial before the court delivered its final judgment at the trial stage.
The circumstances surrounding the killing were particularly serious because the victim was allegedly attacked during a robbery and subsequently abandoned after suffering severe injuries.
The prosecution's case was that the attackers were motivated by the intention to obtain property and that the violence resulted in the victim's death.
The court ultimately accepted the prosecution's evidence.
The case also demonstrates why communities continue to call for effective responses to armed robbery and other violent crimes.
Criminal activities involving weapons can create fear among residents and undermine confidence in the safety of communities.
Rural communities can be particularly vulnerable when criminal incidents occur in areas where emergency services and security personnel may take longer to reach victims.
Garin Galadima and surrounding communities in Akko Local Government Area form part of the wider network of settlements where residents depend on security agencies and community cooperation to prevent violent crime.
The case also shows the importance of reporting criminal incidents and supporting lawful investigations.
Information supplied by witnesses and community members can assist investigators in identifying suspects and building evidence that can eventually be presented before a court.
At the same time, criminal justice authorities must ensure that suspects receive the opportunity to defend themselves and that convictions are based on evidence established through due process.
That principle was reflected in the proceedings against Sule and Hilami, who were allowed to plead to the charges, challenge the prosecution's evidence and present a defence.
The court ultimately determined that the evidence met the required legal standard.
The death sentence announced in Gombe also places attention on the broader debate surrounding capital punishment in Nigeria.
Death sentences remain part of Nigeria's criminal justice framework for certain serious offences, although the process surrounding their implementation involves further legal and constitutional procedures.
A sentence handed down by a trial court does not necessarily mean that an execution will immediately take place.
A convicted person may exercise the right to appeal, allowing a higher court to review the conviction, the evidence, the interpretation of the law or the sentence imposed.
The final outcome of any appeal could therefore affect the status of the judgment.
For now, however, the Gombe State High Court has formally convicted the two men and imposed the maximum penalty available under the circumstances considered by the court.
The judgment also serves as a reminder of the importance of resolving criminal cases through the courts.
Violent incidents can generate anger within communities, particularly when victims lose their lives during robberies.
However, the criminal justice system provides a process through which allegations can be investigated, suspects can be prosecuted and evidence can be tested before an independent court.
The Gombe case followed that process from the initial investigation through prosecution and trial.
The final judgment was based on evidence presented during the proceedings rather than simply on the allegations surrounding the original incident.
For communities affected by violent crime, successful prosecution can also provide a measure of accountability.
Although a court judgment cannot reverse the loss of a life, it can determine legal responsibility where the evidence supports a conviction.
In the case of Murtala Rabi’u, the court's finding means that the two defendants have been held legally responsible for the offences charged and convicted after trial.
The judgment may also reinforce warnings to individuals involved in violent robbery that criminal activities can result in lengthy investigations and serious judicial consequences.
Security agencies continue to face challenges in preventing armed robbery, kidnapping, homicide and other violent crimes across different parts of Nigeria.
While policing and intelligence operations remain essential, effective prosecution is equally important.
A criminal justice system must be able to move cases from investigation to trial without unnecessary delays while ensuring that both victims and defendants receive their lawful rights.
The Gombe judgment demonstrates one example of a case reaching its trial-stage conclusion.
The immediate next legal step will depend on whether the convicted men challenge the decision.
If an appeal is filed, the higher court will determine whether there are grounds to interfere with the conviction or sentence.
Until any such process is concluded, the trial court's judgment remains the current legal position.
The case has therefore entered a new phase following the sentencing of Buhari Sule and Muktari Ali Hilami.
For the family of Murtala Rabi’u, the ruling closes the trial that followed the September 2025 attack, while for the wider Gombe community it underscores the consequences that can follow serious violent crime when evidence is successfully established before a court.
The judgment ultimately sends a clear message about the seriousness with which armed robbery accompanied by loss of life is treated under Nigerian criminal law.
It also reinforces the importance of allowing criminal allegations to be resolved through evidence, due process and judicial determination rather than through extrajudicial action.
As the legal process continues, attention will now turn to whether the convicted men exercise their right of appeal and whether any subsequent proceedings alter the outcome reached by the Gombe State High Court.