“It has also been argued by the Appellant that no evidence was adduced to prove that he forged the documents with his own hand and that the signatories of the documents were also not produced. It is the law that where a document was used as an intermediate step in the scheme of fraud in which the accused is involved, if it shown that such a document was false and was presented or uttered by an accused person in order to gain an advantage, an irresistible inference exist that either the accused forged the document with his own hand or procured someone to commit the forgery. It is immaterial who actually forged a document so long as an accused person is a party to the forgery. In Agwuna v AG Federation (1995) 5 NWLR (Pt. 396) 418, the Supreme Court held per Iguh, JSC as follows
“It is certainly not the law that it is only the person who manually writes or signs a forged document that may be convicted for forgery of the document. The position of the law is that all persons who are participles criminis whether as principals in the first degree or as accessories before or after the fact to a crime are guilty of the offence and may be charged and convicted with [the] actual commission of the crime.” (Emphasis supplied)
See also Osondu v FRN (2000) 12 NWLR (pt. 682) 483; & Hassan v Queen (1959) SCNR 520 at 522.”Per SANKEY, J.C.A. (Pp. 55-56, Paras. B-B).; JUBRIL v. FRN (2018) LPELR-43993(CA)