The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Alleged N313m fraud: Court adjourns ruling on bail

    Justice Hadiza Shagari of the Federal High Court in Lagos will on October 24 rule on a bail application filed by four persons accused of N313 million fraud.

    Akala Anthony (49), Umar Ali (61), Saidi Oke (43) and Bashir Mohammed (44), through their lawyer, Akeem Balogun, filed the application on September 26, claiming to have been incarcerated for four months.

    They were charged along with Dr Chukwuemeka Anyanwu (50), Agboola Gbade (67), Nkechi Nwafor (43) and Larry Balogun (51), who were said to be at large.

    The judge had earlier issued a bench warrant for those at large and directed that they be separated from the charge so that those available could be arraigned.

    Two companies, Granytland Investment Limited and Abroad Development Foundation were also named in the charge.

    Balogun prayed that the court grant his clients bail on liberal terms, adding that they would not jump bail.

    Prosecuting counsel M. A Animas- haun argued that the accused do not deserve to be granted bail due to the seriousness of the offence.

    The first to fourth respondents, in an amended charge, were accused of conspiring to defraud one Austin Albert of N313,200 million while pretending to assist him buy $1 million.

    They allegedly committed the offence on June 15 in Lekki, Lagos.

    The alleged offence contravenes Section 8 (b) of the Advance Fee fraud and other Related Offenses Act 2006 and punishable under Section 1(3).

     

  • Woman in court for alleged stealing fraud

    The police in Ibadan, Oyo State, have sued a 37-year-old woman, Oyeranti Martins, at an Iyaganku Magistrates’ Court, Ibadan for allegedly obtaining N7million under false pretence.

    Martins, of Plot 6, Afolabi Femi Street, All Saint Road, Idi-Ishin, Ibadan, is facing a five-count charge on obtaining money under false pretence.

    The prosecutor, Salewa Ahmed, told the court that the accused committed the offences between 2014 and 2015.

    He said: “Martins fraudulently collected N6 million from Osubu Adenike on the pretext of selling shares of First City Monument Bank to her.

    “She also fraudulently collected N1million from Florence Oluwawemida on the pretext of selling shares to her, knowing same to be false.”

    Ahmed said the accused converted the N7million collected from the complainants to her use.

    He said the offences contravened sections 383, 419, 516 and 390 (9) of the Criminal Code, Cap 38, Vol. II, Laws of Oyo State, 2000.

    The accused pleaded not guilty.

    The Magistrate, Mrs. M.A. Amole-Ajimoti, granted the accused bail at N500,000 with two sureties.

    She said one of the sureties must be a relation of the accused and adjourned the case till December 22 for mention.

  • Two in court for alleged extortion 

    Two in court for alleged extortion 

    A Karu Magistrates’ Court, Abuja, has admitted Ismaila Yusuf and Chioma Eze to bail of N1,000,000 for alleged joint act and extortion.

    The Magistrate, Folashade Oyekan, ordered the defendants to produce one surety each.

    She said the surety must be a civil servant of Grade Level 8 and above. She adjourned the case till December 6 for hearing.

    Ismaila, a tailor of Gwagwalada and Chioma, a businesswoman of Mararaba, are facing a two-count charge of joint act and extortion.

    The police prosecutor, Mahmud Lawal, told the court that Regina Emmanuel of 24, Alabi Close, Dutse Alhaji, Abuja, reported the matter at Maitama Police Station, Abuja, on October 31.

    He alleged that on December 30, 2016, the complainant entered the same vehicle with the defendants from NICON Junction, Maitama to Dutse Alhaji, adding that they conspired and stole her two phones and wristwatch.

    Lawal said other items stolen included handbag, bread, biscuit and perfume, valued at N88,400.

    The defendants pleaded not guilty.

    Lawal said the offence contravened sections 79 and 292 of the Penal Code.

  • Court rules on violation of rights suit Dec 8

    Court rules on violation of rights suit Dec 8

    The Federal High Court, Abuja, has fixed December 8 to rule on a breach of fundamental human rights suit filed by former President Jonathan’s wife Patience.

    Jonathan is asking the court to compel the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to respect her fundamental rights to privacy, dignity and fair hearing, which she says have been serially violated.

    The former first lady is also demanding N2 billion from the EFCC as general damages and compensation for the violation of her fundamental rights.

    When the matter was called up yesterday, counsel to Jonathan, Mr. Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN), told the court that the EFCC had taken it upon itself to be an aggressive persecutor of his client.

    According to Adedipe, the EFCC is expected to charge my client to court and not decide single- handedly that the houses or funds acquired by her are proceeds of crime.

    “The rights conferred on citizens by Chapter 4 of the Constitution are fundamental rights which are distinct from statutory rights, which can be tossed around.

    “Fundamental rights are such that no one is permitted to infringe on it. Moreover, the constitution is written to protect the citizens from the `good’ intentions of government.

    “The government has enormous powers and that is why the constitution is there to protect the citizens from such powers.”

    The senior advocate prayed the court to order EFCC to desist from the incessant harassment of his client, and act as the statutory commission empowered by its Act to fight graft.

    EFCC counsel Mr. F. Abdullah opposed the application and prayed the court to refuse the reliefs sought by Jonathan on the grounds that they were unmeritorious.

    Abdullah referred the court to Section 44 (2) (k) of the Constitution, saying that the right of a citizen to own property was not absolute.

    The Judge, Justice John Tsoho, adjourned the matter until Dec. 8 to give his ruling.

  • Jonathan’s wife begs court to unfreeze accounts with N3.5b, $5.8m

    Jonathan’s wife begs court to unfreeze accounts with N3.5b, $5.8m

    •Judge to hear motion Nov 23

    Former President Goodluck Jonathan’s wife, Patience, has asked a Federal High Court to lift the temporary freeze issued on 16 accounts allegedly held in banks by her and some firms linked to her.

    The accounts, said to contain $5.8 million and N3.5 billion, are domicile in six banks.

    Mrs. Jonathan’s request is contained in a motion she filed before the court, and in which she faulted the method adopted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in obtaining two ex-parte interim freezing orders on the accounts.

    She contended that the freezing orders have lapsed and should be vacated, having been first made on May 30 this year and renewed on October 10.

    Mrs. Jonathan said the accounts were maintained by her, the Incorporated Trustees of her foundation -Ariwabai Aruera Reachout Foundation – and nine other companies in which she has interest.

    She argued that the orders of interim forfeiture made on May 30, 2017, including a subsequent one issued on October 10, 2017, have become spent and could no longer be extended, because the original order was obtained through an improper use of court process by the EFCC.

    She stated in the motion filed by her lawyer Mike Ozekhome (SAN) that the Federal High Court in Abuja, on May 30, 2017 granted an ex-parte order in favour of the Federal Government against all the accounts own and operated by her and the companies

    She said the same Federal Government later went before the Lagos division of the court, presided over by Justice C.M.A Olatoregun to obtain similar order on October 10 in respect of accounts held by her, Finchley Top Homes Limited and Ariwabai Aruera Reachout Foundation.

    Mrs. Jonathan added that prior to the grant of the ex-parte motion by the court in Abuja, the Federal Government had filed a similar application before Justice Olatoregun of Lagos division but failed to disclose the fact that it had obtained same reliefs in Lagos.

    She said the owners of the money were never served with the interim order and that they became aware of it during a hearing of a petition she lodged at the National Assembly.

    When the case was called yesterday before Justice Binta Nyako, Ozekhome urged the court to first here his client’s motion before the one filed by the EFCC for the extension of the orders earlier made by the court.

    Lawyer to the EFCC Richard Dauda insisted that his application should take precedence.

    Justice Nyako, however, adjourned to November 23.

  • Drama: Judge compels accused to lead own defence witness

    Drama: Judge compels accused to lead own defence witness

    There was a mild drama at the Federal High Court II, Jos, on Thursday when the Judge compelled an accused being tried by the court to lead his defence witness, following the absence of his (accused) counsel in court.

    The accused, Ibrahim Suleiman, a Jos-based business man, has been standing trial since 2007 over alleged involvement in hacking into the system of the defunct First Inland Bank plc.

    He is being tried by EFCC on a seven-count charge of money laundering, contrary to Money Laundry Prohibition Act of 2004, among others.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that trouble began for the accused when a letter came from his two counsel, Mr Uche Mgbemena and Mr S. Ogunbiyi, explaining their inability to be in court to represent him.

    Mgbemena was bereaved while Ogunbiyi said he was ill and not fit enough to be in court.

    When the case came up before the judge, Justice Ayo Emmanuel, the accused pleaded with the court to adjourn the case following the hiccups created by the absence of his counsel.

    However, the judge refused his appeal.

    “The last time we sat on Oct. 12, 2017, we all agreed that you will take your subpoenaed defence witness today on resumption, more so that you have exhausted your adjournment privileges.

    “As you can see, the prosecution counsel has opposed your application for adjournment.

    “So, you have to continue with your case now that the defence witness is here for you to ask him your questions,” Emmanuel said.

    However, Suleiman, who was unrelenting in his pleas, said: “My Lord, my counsels are not here in court and I am constrained now.

    “I can’t continue on my own because I don’t even know what to ask him (Defense witness).’’

    “As it is now, I don’t even have the documents such as the bank statements of my account which are with my counsel; supposing I have them, I may try.

    “My Lord, I am not a lawyer and I don’t think I can do it,” he pleaded.

    The Judge then ordered the court clerks to quickly produce the statements of account from the case file and present to the accused.

    At this point, Suleiman studied the documents and engaged his own witness, Mr David Joshua, a Fund Transfer Officer with Sterling Bank Plc, for almost three hours.

    When the accused asked the witness whether some of the entries and withdrawals contained in the two statements tagged Exhibits P12 and D10 could be said to be regular, the witness said, “they are not regular’’.

    “This kind of transactions are not regular; both statements of accounts are contradicting themselves. In P12, N400.7 million came in on June 29, 2007 but it came in D10 after N165m came in the same day.’’

    “Looking at the transactions that took place, nothing like hacking took place; this I can prove,’’ he said.

    Joshua said that what happened was a manipulation done by a bank staff.

    “In banking system, a bank statement of a customer can be obtained in any branch of the bank and it will always be the same irrespective of the time.’’

    Joshua explained that the sum contained in the petition letter tagged as Exhibit P1 could not be seen in both P12 and D10.

    The Prosecution Counsel, Mr Cosmas Ugwu, in his cross examination of the witness, asked him whether a banker would deliberately do such transactions in both P12 and D10.

    In his response, Joshua said: “yes; with a different intention, such narrations can be done.’’

  • Court docks man over motorcycle theft

    Court docks man over motorcycle theft

    A 35-year-old man, Akinyele Sabitu, who allegedly stole a Bajaj motorcycle valued at N95,000 was on Wednesday brought before an Ota Magistrates’ Court in Ogun state.

    Sabitu, whose address is unknown, is facing a count charge of stealing.

    The Prosecutor, Cpl. Abdulkareem Mustapha, told the court that the accused committed the offence on Nov. 9 at about 11.40 p. m., at No. 14, Adeyanju Str., General Hospital, Ota.

    Mustapha said that the accused stole a Bajaj Motorcycle with registration number TRE 458 UU, valued at N95, 000 from the place where the complainant, one Arewole Seun, parked the motorcycle.

    “The accused was caught in the act by some passers-by and handed over to the police,’’ he said.

    Read also: Six docked for beating DPO

    According to him, the offences contravened Section 390(a) of the Criminal Code, Laws of Ogun, 2006.

    The accused, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge.

    The Chief Magistrate, Mrs B. B. Adebowale, granted bail to the accused in the sum of N100, 000 with two sureties in like sum.

    She said that the sureties must reside within the court’s jurisdiction and swear to an affidavit of means.

    Adebowale also ordered that the sureties provide evidence of tax payment to the Ogun State Government and submit four recent passport photographs to the court, as part of the bail conditions.

    The case was adjourned until Nov. 23, for hearing.

    NAN.

  • Patience Jonathan’s N350m frozen

    Patience Jonathan’s N350m frozen

    The Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday granted an order temporarily freezing N350 million allegedly traced to  former President Goodluck Jonathan’s wife Dame Patience.

    The money is in an account domiciled in Stanbic IBTC, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) said.

    Justice Hadiza Rabiu-Shagari granted the comission’s ex-parte application filed by its lawyer  Rotimi Oyedepo.

    The EFCC said the money was allegedly transferred to a company’s account when Mrs Jonathan served as a permanent secretary in Bayelsa State between 2012 and 2013.

    The commission alleged that the former First Lady “unlawfully enriched” herself with the money.

    In a supporting affidavit to the application, an investigating officer at the EFCC, Musbahu Yahaya, said the commission received “a cogent, direct and positive intelligence report” that a company, AM-PM Global Network Limited, was in possession of proceeds of unlawful act and retained it in an account.

    He said that between June 20, 2012 and November 15, 2013, the company fraudulently received N1,206,950,000 via its Diamond Bank account, numbered 0026718889.

    The EFCC said the money was “proceeds of unlawful enrichment derived by Mrs. Dame Patience Jonathan, who was then a permanent secretary appointed by the Bayelsa State government.”

    According to the deponent, in a bid to dissipate the funds, the company opened an account numbered 0016971559 with Stanbic IBTC.

    He said: “Out of the alleged proceed of unlawful enrichment of Mrs. Dame Patience Jonathan, the respondent transferred the total sum of N350 million from its account in Diamond Bank to the account sought to be attached (Stanbic IBTC) in a desperate bid to dissipate the funds.

    “We have traced the said N350 million to the respondent’s (AM-PM Global Network’s) account sought to be attached and the order of this court is needed to instruct the bank to attach the account to prevent the dissipation of the funds.

    “The respondent is making frantic effort to dissipate these funds,” the deponent said.

    The EFCC said that unless the application was urgently heard and determined, the company would tamper with the account.

    “It will serve the course of justice to grant this application,” the commission said.

    Deciding the application as prayed, Justice Hadiza granted “an order directing Manager of the Stanbic IBTC Bank to, in the interim, freeze the account pending the determination of the investigation and possible prosecution of this case.”

    The EFCC, however, did not state in the affidavit who owns the company.

    Two other judges of the court, Justice Mohammed Idris and Justice Mojisola Olatoregun-Ishola, had earlier frozen Mrs Jonathan’s accounts.

    Justice Idris freezed her accounts with $15.5 million. Mrs Jonathan is praying the court to unfreeze the accounts.

    The EFCC, however, urged the court not to unfreeze them because the money was suspected to be “proceed of crime”.

    Justice Olatoregun freezed Mrs Jonathan’s account with $5.7million. The EFCC is seeking permanent forfeiture of the money.

    The judge, on April 26, made an interim order forfeiting the money to the Federal Government.

    Justice Olatoregun also ordered the temporary forfeiture N2,421,953,522.78 found in an Ecobank Nigeria Ltd account numbered 2022000760 in the name of La Wari Furniture and Baths Ltd.

    The commission said the money also belongs to Mrs Jonathan.

    Justice Olatoregun stayed proceedings pending the outcome of an appeal challenging the temporary forfeiture of the $5.7 million.

    Also yesterday, Justice Idris refused an application by a former Senior Special Assistant to ex-President Jonathan on Domestic Affairs, Dr Waripamo-Owei Dudafa, to travel abroad for medical treatment.

    Dudafa, through his lawyer Mr. Gboyega Oyewole (SAN), urged the court to order the release of his international passport to enable him travel abroad to treat spinal cord injury which he claimed to have sustained while in EFCC custody.

    But, Oyedepo urged the court not to grant the application on the grounds that the EFCC had written to a Lagos State government hospital to examine Dudafa’s health and to determine whether he could be treated in the country or abroad.

    Justice Idris faulted Dudafa’s application, saying that a motion of such nature ought to be backed by hard evidence that the problem cannot be treated in Nigeria.

    “I find it difficult to grant this application. I hereby dismissed it,” Justice Idris ruled.

     

     

  • Court reserves judgment in appeal against Saraki’s acquittal

    Court reserves judgment in appeal against Saraki’s acquittal

    THE Court of Appeal in Abuja has reserved judgment in the appeal by the Federal Government asking it to set aside the acquittal of Senate President Bukola Saraki on charges of false assets declaration.

    A three-man panel of the appellate court, led by Justice Tinuade Akomolafe Wilson, told parties after they adopted their briefs of argument yesterday that the court would inform them when judgment was ready.

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), in a ruling on June 14 this year, discharged and acquitted Saraki on the 18-count charge of false assets declaration, among others, brought against him by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB).

    In his lead ruling on June 14, CCT’s Chairman, Danladi Umar, upheld Saraki’s no-case submission and held that the prosecution was unable to prove its allegations against the defendant.

    Dissatisfied with the CCT’s decision, the Federal Government, through the CCB, approached the Court of Appeal and sought among others the voiding of the tribunal’s ruling.

    Adopting the appellant’s brief yesterday, lawyer to the CCB, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), urged the court to uphold the appeal, reverse the CCT’s decision and order Saraki to enter his defence in the case.

    Jacobs contended that the CCT was in error when it adjudged as hearsay, the oral evidence by the prosecution’s third witness, who is the Head, Intelligence Unit at the CCB,  Samuel  Madojemu,

    He added: “It is our position that the lower tribunal did not consider the evidence adduced by the prosecution. The empahsis I will like to make is on the evidence of PW3.

    “We argue that there is nothing like hearsay evidence in the oral evidence of PW3, who is the investigative officer.

    “There are authorities of the Supreme Court that say once the evidence of a witness is supported by documentary evidence, his oral testimony merely the hanger that holds the evidence.”

    Jacobs urged the Court of Appeal to hold that the Code of Conduct Tribunal was wrong in “upholding a no-case submission raised by the respondent at the close of prosecution‘s case”.

    He equally urged the court to hold that the learned members of the tribunal were wrong “in holding that the respondent was not invited by the EFCC (the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission) in the course of its investigation”.

    Jacobs argued that the tribunal was wrong “in holding that the investigation conducted by a team of investigators from the EFCC and the CCB was illegal and unknown to law.”

    He faulted the tribunal’s conclusion that “failure to produce the original asset declaration forms and the written statement of the respondent, is fatal to the case of the prosecution when the prosecution tendered the certified true copies (CTC) of the documents.”

    Jacobs also argued that the tribunal was wrong “in upholding the no-case submission in the instant case.

    Jacobs urged the court to hold that the CCT ruling was perverse.

    Saraki’s lawyer and former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Kanu Agabi (SAN)  urged the court to dismiss the Federal Government’s appeal on the grounds that it was without merit.

    The former AGF said: “They contended that because PW3’s evidence supported by documents it was not hearsay, but there are no documents in support of the evidence.

    “The witness said he derived his evidence from what he was told by somebody he did not name.

    “The contention of the appellant (prosecution) at the tribunal was that the onus was on the respondent (Saraki) to prove his innocence. It is not surprising that they did not call witnesses.

    “May I urge your lordship to dismiss this appeal, it has merit.”

    He urged the court to answer in the affirmative the questions he raised for determination.

     

    They include:

    “Whether the tribunal was right when it held, contrary to the submission of the prosecution, that the burden of proof was upon the prosecution and not the defendant and that the prosecution failed to discharge that burden.

    “Whether the tribunal was right when it held that the prosecution had not made out a case warranting an answer from the defendant and in consequence made an order discharging and acquitting the defendant.

    “Whether the tribunal was right when it held that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was hearsay, which afflicted and bedevilled the entirety of the prosecution’s case in violation of sections 37, 38 and 126 of the Evidence Act; and

    “Whether the tribunal was right when it held that the hearsay evidence of the prosecution coupled with the general reference to a team the membership of which was not specified could not establish a prima facie case against the defendant.”

    “Whether the tribunal was right when it held that the failure of the prosecution to respond to seven of the issues raised by the defendant constituted an admission of those issues leaving the tribunal with no alternative than to rule that no case had been made out against the defendant warranting an answer from him.”

     

  • Court strikes out criminal charge against Lagos prince, others

    An Igbosere Magistrate Court has struck out a criminal charge filed against a Lagos Prince, Tajudeen Onikoyi, and three others by the Police.

    The court upheld their no-case submission.

    The other defendants are: Idowu Johnson, Bolaji Onikoyi and Abari Onikoyi.

    The Police charged them with three counts bordering on breach of public peace, to which they pleaded not guilty.

    Upholding the no-case submission, Magistrate, A. F. Adeeyo held  that the prosecution failed to prove allegation beyond reasonable doubt.

    “In our criminal justice system, without exception, the onus and duty are  on the prosecution  to establish and prove the guilt of the defendant beyond  reasonable doubt and this burden never shifts.

    “It is not essential for the  prosecution to prove its case with absolute certainty, but the ingredients of the offence must be proved as  required by law and to the satisfaction of the court.

    “There was no clear and distinct  evidence as to which weapon each defendant carried to damage the fence on the land. No evidence was also led on who  amongst the four defendants damaged the fence and with which of the weapons allegedly brought on the land.

    “PW1 gave evidence that Oba Onikoyi  sent a photographer to the land to take photographs but no photograph was tendered by the prosecution to show the  extent of the alleged damage on the fence.

    “The prosecution has woefully failed to show that any of the four defendants’ conducted himself in a manner likely to cause breach of the peace in a public  place.

    “Having reviewed each of the three counts,  I hold that the defendants’ submission of no-case submission succeeds as the three counts charge against the four  defendants’ cannot be sustained with the evidence before the  court.

    “Consequently, the four defendants, Prince Tajudeen Onikoyi, Idowu Johnson, Bolaji Onikoyi and Abari Onikoyi are hereby discharged and acquitted on counts  one, two  and three.”