The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Maryam Sanda

  • Restoring mercy

    Restoring mercy

    There is new opportunity for Presidential clemency for Maryam Sanda

    The Supreme Court of Nigeria recently affirmed the death verdict passed by lower courts on Abuja-based housewife Maryam Sanda for killing her husband in a 2017 domestic dispute. Sanda, daughter-in-law to a former National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), was sentenced to death by hanging in January 2020 by the High Court in Abuja, which found her guilty of fatally stabbing Bilyamin Bello at their home in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    Following her conviction by the trial court, Sanda had headed to the Court of Appeal, which upheld the death sentence. She approached the Supreme Court with a further appeal, on which the justices delivered their verdict on December 12, 2025.

    The apex court, in a split decision by four justices against one, dismissed Sanda’s appeal and resolved all issues she raised against her conviction as being without any merit. In the lead judgment, Justice Moore Adumein held that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, and that the appellate court was right in affirming the trial court’s verdict.

    Against the backdrop of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu having commuted Sanda’s death sentence to 12 years imprisonment, the Supreme Court further held that it was “wrong for the Executive to seek to exercise its power of pardon over a case of culpable homicide in respect of which an appeal was pending.”

    Referencing several past judgments, Justice Adumein noted that the court had consistently criticised the executive arm for granting pardons to those convicted of capital offences while their appeals were pending. He said the clemency extended to Sanda did not strip the court of its jurisdiction to hear her appeal and issue appropriate orders.

    READ ALSO: No place for terrorists, kidnappers in Kwara, says Abdulrazaq as forest guards end training

    “By Section 233(2)(d) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has jurisdiction, to the exclusion of any other court, to hear and determine appeals from the Court of Appeal where, as in this case, a death sentence was affirmed. I do not think that this jurisdiction can be affected by the grant of pardon by the Executive when an appeal against the death sentence is still pending in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. When an appeal against a death sentence is pending, it is better and safer to delay granting amnesty or pardon to the convicted person. The grant of pardon during the pendency of appeal does not prevent the court from proceeding to determine the appeal on its merit,” the justice argued.

    The Presidency had in October commuted Sanda’s sentence to 12 years, following public outrage over wholesale pardon granted her. There were 174 other beneficiaries of the presidential prerogative of mercy.

    According to a federal gazette of October 23, 2025, the presidential prerogative was exercised in pursuance of Section 175 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). It explained that Sanda’s sentence commutation was on compassionate grounds.

    The gazette, released by Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, read: “Maryam Sanda, whose offence was culpable homicide, sentenced on 27/01/2020 to death by hanging, having served six years and eight months at the Medium Security Custodial Centre (MSCC), Suleja, will now serve 12 years based on compassionate grounds.” The gazette said this was in the best interest of her two children, and for her “good conduct, embraced new lifestyle, being a model prisoner and remorsefulness.”

    Corroborating the gazette in a statement, Attorney-General of the Federation and Justice Minister Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) said the presidential prerogative that earlier granted Sanda and others clemency was reviewed following consultations with the National Council of State. He explained: “This exercise underscores the President’s desire to balance justice with compassion and the belief that justice must not only punish, but also reform and redeem. The review was undertaken with meticulous commitment to due process to reinforce the administration’s broader commitment to justice reform and humane correctional practices in line with international standards.”

    No matter the good intention of the prerogative of mercy, however, due process was certainly not followed. Sanda’s appeal had already been heard by the Supreme Court on October 2, 2025 and reserved for judgment, before the President commuted her sentence. That is to say, the judicial process was ongoing when the executive arm butted in with the sentence commutation. It is absurd to think the apex court would let go of its constitutional duty because the President purported to commute Sanda’s sentence while her appeal was pending.

    We consider it obvious that Mr President was badly advised. It was the act of the special duties office. Justice Minister Fagbemi stepped in after this embarrassing misstep.

     Now that the judicial process has been exhausted, the President could do a fresh commutation of Sanda’s sentence – if only for process tidying. Separation of powers, observance of rule of law, and respect for judicial process, particularly that of the apex court, is key to strengthening our democracy.

  • Supreme Court affirms Maryam Sanda’s death sentence

    Supreme Court affirms Maryam Sanda’s death sentence

    • Says pardon can’t stop it from hearing pending appeal on capital offences

    The Supreme Court has overridden the pardon granted by President Bola Tinubu to an Abuja-based house wife, Maryam Sanda, who was convicted and sentenced to death by hanging, in 2020, for killing her husband, Bilyaminu Bello, during a domestic dispute.

    President Tinubu had, in exercising the power of prerogative of mercy, reduced Sanda’s sentence to 12 years imprisonment.

    In a judgment a on Friday, the Supreme Court, in a split decision of four-to-one, affirmed the death sentence handed Sanda by a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT); in a judgment given on January 27, 2020, which was upheld by the Court of Appeal in a judgment handed out on December 4, 2020, which decision Sanda appeal to the Supreme Court.

    The apex court, in its majority decision, resolved the three issues, identified by the court for determination, against Sanda and dismissed the appeal for being without merit.

    The judgment was on the appeal, marked: SC/CR/1141/2023 filed by Sanda against the Court of Appeal judgment of December 4, 2020.

    In the opening part of the lead majority judgment, Justice Moore Adumein held that it was wrong for the Executive to exercise its power of pardon over a case of culpable homicide, in respect of which an appeal was pending before the Supreme Court.

    Justice Adumein quoted from past decisions of both the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal where the courts had deprecated the act of the Executive for granting pardon to a convict of a capital offence while an appeal against the conviction was still pending.

    He held that the pardon granted Sanda did not take away the court’s jurisdiction to hear, determine the appeal.

    Justice Adumein added: “By Section 233(2)(d) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to the exclusion of any other court, to hear and determine appeal from the Court of Appeal where, as in this case, a decision of a death sentence was affirmed.

    Read Also: Tinubu unveils new security, economic blueprint to harness Nigeria’s marine wealth

    “I do not think that this jurisdiction can be affected by the grant of pardon by the Executive when an appeal against the death sentence is still pending in the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

    “When an appeal against death sentence is pending, it is better and safer to delay granting amnesty or pardon to the convicted person.

    “The grant of pardon during the pendency of appeal does not prevent the court from proceeding to determine the appeal on the merit,” he said.

    In determining the appeal Justice Adumein faulted the appellant’s argument that the case ought to have be commenced by the prosecuting agency – the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) command of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) – through an information and not a charge.

    He notes that by the provision of Section 100(d) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 a criminal proceeding could be initiated or commenced by information or charge filed in court by the prosecuting authority as in this case.

    The judge said: “If one may ask, how was the appellant adversely affected or prejudiced by the prosecuting authority filing a charge instead of an information.

    “The appellant has not been. Able to show that the decisions of the two courts below were perverse because the criminal case was commenced by a charge and not an information.”

    Justice Adumein held that the Court of Appeal was right in affirming the January 27, 2020 judgment of the trial court because the prosecution effectively discharged the burden of proof placed on it by the law and established the appellant:s guilt.

    He added:”What is obvious in this appeal is that both the trial court and the Court of Appeal made concurrent findings that the deceased was intentionally killed by the appellant, who had a premeditated plan to murder him.

    “I agree with the respondent that this court has no reason to disturb the concurrent findings oftge two lower courts.”

    The judge equally faulted the appellant’s argument that, in view of the provision of Section 221 of the Child Right Act 2003, the Court of Appeal was wrong to have affirmed the death sentence handed to the appellant by the trial court.

    The appellant had, among others, argued that Section 221 of the Child Right Act 2003 precluded a trial court from sentencing a nursing mother to death if she was a nursing mother at the time of her conviction and sentencing.

    The court held that beside the fact that the argument about the application of Section 221 of the Child Right Act 2003 was not made before the lower court, there was no evidence before the court at the time of her conviction sentence that she was either an expectant mother or a nursing mother.

    He added: “The principal intendment of the Child Right Act 2003 is the protection of the rights of the Nigerian child as proclaimed in the preamble to the Act.

    “It is clearly not the intention of the law makers that the Act be used as a legal shield preventing an expectant mother or nursing mother from criminal prosecution or criminal liability.

    “Therefore, any purported non-compliance with the Section 221(2) of the Act, as alleged in this case, cannot be a tool for exculpating or exonerating a Nigerian mother from the consequences of committing a very serious offence such armed robbery, culpable homicide punishable with death or murder.

    “Put differently, the provision of Section 221(2) of the Child Right Act 2003 should not be interpreted in such a way that it can be used by a certain class of people in Nigeria as a sword or tool to commit grievous crimes and be automatically exonerated after a valid trial and conviction.

    “An interpretation of Section 221(2) of the Act that will give such class of people the entitlement to kill without penal consequences will be very dangerous or hazardous to the whole society.

    “I am of the view that by Section 221(2) of the Act, it cannot be the honest intention of the law makers that death penalty cannot and must not recorded against a nursing mother, validly tried and convicted for serious crimes such as armed robbery, culpable homicide and murder.

    “The appellant was found guilty of culpable homicide punishable with death under Section 221 of the Penal Code law, and based on the numerous authorities of this court, which I have cited in this judgment, the trial court was right to have entered a sentence of death against the appellant.

    “Having resolved all the issues raised in this appeal against the appellant, this appeal is bereft of any merit and it is hereby dismissed,” Justice Adumein said.

    He then affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which upheld the decision of the trial court.

    Justices Uwani Abba-Aji, Ibrahim Saulawa and Chidiebere Uwa agreed with the lead majority judgment, while Justice Emmanuel Agim dissented.

    In his dissenting judgment, Justice Agim allowed the appeal and set aside Sanda’s conviction and sentence.

  • BREAKING: Supreme Court overrides FG’s pardon for Maryam Sanda, affirms death sentence

    BREAKING: Supreme Court overrides FG’s pardon for Maryam Sanda, affirms death sentence

    The Supreme Court has overridden the pardon granted by President Bola Tinubu to an Abuja-based house wife, Maryam Sanda, who was in 2020 sentenced to death by hanging for killing her husband, Bilyaminu Bello, during a domestic dispute.

    President Tinubu had reduced Sanda’s sentence to 12 years imprisonment on compassionate ground.

    But in a judgment a on Friday, the Supreme Court, in a split decision of four-to-one, affirmed the death sentence handed Sanda by the Court of Appeal, Abuja which upheld the decision of a HIgh Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), sentencing her to death by hanging.

    Read Also: I appealed to Buhari to pardon Maryam Sanda – Father-in-law

    The Apex Court resolved all the issues raised in the appeal she filed against her and dismissed the appeal for being without merit.

    Justice Moore Adumein held in the lead judgment, which he personally delivered, that the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt as required, adding that the Court of Appeal was right to have affirmed the judgement of the trial court.

    Justice Adumein held that it was wrong for the Executive to seek to exercise its power of pardon over a case of culpable homicide, in respect of which an appeal was pending.

    Details shortly…

  • I appealed to Buhari to pardon Maryam Sanda, says father-in-law

    I appealed to Buhari to pardon Maryam Sanda, says father-in-law

    The father of the late Bilyaminu Bello, Alhaji Ahmed Bello Isa, who was murdered by his wife, Maryam Sanda, in 2017, has revealed how he appealed to late President Muhammad Buhari and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to pardon his daughter-in-law.

    He made the revelations in a joint interview conducted in Abuja with Alhaji Garba Sanda, father of Maryam.

    In an unexpected turn of events which underscores an exceptional demonstration of forgiveness and large-heartedness, he expressed his joy over the pardon of his daughter-in-law by President Tinubu.

    He recalled how he had been on a quiet quest to secure freedom for Maryam, who had been on death row since her sentencing for the murder of her husband.

    He said his motivation was purely humanitarian, and that he wanted his daughter-in-law released so she could look after her two young children, and that executing her would not bring back his son.

    He explained that, as a devout Muslim, he had long accepted the tragic incident which has been a subject of public discussion, choosing to forgive and leave judgment to Allah.

    Alhaji Isa had previously written to both the then Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), and the Commissioner of Police, FCT Command in 2019, to seek clemency for Maryam Sanda.

    Although those early appeals went unanswered, the recent pardon granted by President Tinubu under the Presidential Prerogative of Mercy finally brought his request to fruition.

    He made the first plea for Sanda to be set free even before her conviction in January 2020. 

    He recalled writing to the Commissioner of Police on January 17th, 2019, stating that he had forgiven whoever was responsible for his son’s death and appealing that the charge be withdrawn “so that my son’s soul could rest in peace according to Islamic injunction.”

    He also swore an affidavit at the FCT High Court on June 21st, 2019, reaffirming his forgiveness and pleading that the prosecution be withdrawn.

    Also in his letter dated December 16th, 2024, titled “Request for Exercise of Prerogative of Mercy for My Daughter-in-Law, Maryam Sanda Sentenced to Death by Hanging,” Alhaji Bello Isa wrote: “There is nothing more painful than for someone to lose a son in the way I lost my son, Bilyaminu. However, what gives me some measure of comfort is that he left behind two beautiful children, my granddaughter, Sa’adatu Bilyaminu, and my grandson, Bilyaminu Bilyaminu, named after his father.

    “I have forgiven Maryam who was found guilty of killing my son. Before the end of the trial, I made every effort to let both the police and the court to know that I did not want her prosecuted, because I did not want a situation where my grandchildren, who had lost their father so tragically, would also lose their mother.

    Read Also: ‎Stanley Uzochukwu congratulates Seyi Tinubu on 40th birthday

    “I have taken it as the will of Almighty Allah, what happened to my son, and I do not blame Maryam for it. However, now that she has been sentenced to death, I beg in the name of Almighty Allah for mercy. If she is killed, who will take care of her two children? They will grow up as orphans, without a father or a mother’s love.”

    The grieving father emphasized that since the 2020 judgment, the children had only been able to see and bond with their mother during occasional visits to the Suleja Correctional Facility, a situation he described as “heartbreaking for innocent children.” Responding to reports that some family members objected to his forgiveness and petition for clemency, Alhaji Isa said he understood that people would hold different opinions on such a sensitive matter, but as both a father and a Muslim, he believes this was the best course of action for peace and humanity.

    “Vengeance cannot bring back my son. But forgiveness can bring peace to my family, to her family, and to the children who must not suffer any longer,” he stated.

    Also speaking, father of Maryam, Alhaji Garba Sanda, expressed deep gratitude to Alhaji Isa and his entire family for their rare act of compassion, describing it as “a true reflection of faith and forgiveness.”

    He said: “Words cannot describe our appreciation to the Bello family for this gesture of mercy and reconciliation. We continue to pray that something positive may yet emerge from this regrettable tragedy, that our families may heal, and that these children will grow up knowing love from both sides of their family.”

    The two families, stated that they have chosen forgiveness, compassion, and faith over pain, and have committed to working together to raise the children in an atmosphere of peace and love.

  • I appealed to Buhari to pardon Maryam Sanda – Father-in-law

    I appealed to Buhari to pardon Maryam Sanda – Father-in-law

    Alhaji Ahmed Bello Isa, the biological father of the late Bilyaminu Bello, who was murdered by his wife, Maryam Sanda, in 2017, has revealed how he appealed to late President Muhammad Buhari and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to pardon his daughter-in-law.

    He made the revelations in a joint interview conducted in Abuja with Alhaji Garba Sanda, the father of Maryam.

    In an unexpected turn of events, which underscores an exceptional demonstration of forgiveness and large-heartedness, he expressed his joy over the pardon of his daughter-in-law by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

    He recalled how he had been on a quiet quest to secure freedom for Maryam, who had been on death row since her sentencing for the murder of her husband.

    He said his motivation was purely humanitarian, and that he wanted his daughter-in-law released so she could look after her two young children, and that executing her would not bring back his son.

    He explained that, as a devout Muslim, he had long accepted the tragic incident, which has been a subject of public discussion, choosing to forgive and leave judgment to Allah.

    It has been revealed that Alhaji Ahmed Bello Isa had previously written to both the then Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), and the Commissioner of Police, FCT Command in 2019, to seek clemency for Maryam Sanda.

    Although those early appeals went unanswered, the recent pardon granted by President Tinubu under the Presidential Prerogative of Mercy finally brought his request to fruition.

    He made the first plea for Sanda to be set free even before her conviction in January 2020. 

    He recalled writing to the Commissioner of Police on 17th January 2019, stating that he had forgiven whoever was responsible for his son’s death and appealing that the charge be withdrawn “so that my son’s soul could rest in peace according to Islamic injunction.”

    He also swore an affidavit at the FCT High Court on 21st June 2019, reaffirming his forgiveness and pleading that the prosecution be withdrawn.

    Also in his letter dated 16th December 2024, titled “Request for Exercise of Prerogative of Mercy for My Daughter-in-Law, Maryam Sanda Sentenced to Death by Hanging,” Alhaji Bello Isa wrote:

    “There is nothing more painful than for someone to lose a son in the way I lost my son, Bilyaminu. However, what gives me some measure of comfort is that he left behind two beautiful children, my granddaughter, Sa’adatu Bilyaminu, and my grandson, Bilyaminu Bilyaminu, named after his father.

    “I have forgiven Maryam, who was found guilty of killing my son. Before the end of the trial, I made every effort to let both the Police and the Court know that I did not want her prosecuted, because I did not want a situation where my grandchildren, who had lost their father so tragically, would also lose their mother.”

    In his words, “I have taken it as the will of Almighty Allah, what happened to my son, and I do not blame Maryam for it. However, now that she has been sentenced to death, I beg in the name of Almighty Allah for mercy. If she is killed, who will take care of her two children? They will grow up as orphans, without a father or a mother’s love.”

    The grieving father emphasised that since the 2020 judgment, the children had only been able to see and bond with their mother during occasional visits to the Suleja Correctional Facility, a situation he described as “heartbreaking for innocent children.”

    Responding to reports that some family members objected to his forgiveness and petition for clemency, Alhaji Bello Isa said he understood that people would hold different opinions on such a sensitive matter, but as both a father and a Muslim, he believes this was the best course of action for peace and humanity.

    “Vengeance cannot bring back my son,” he said quietly. “But forgiveness can bring peace to my family, to her family, and to the children who must not suffer any longer.”

    Also speaking, Alhaji Garba Sanda, father of Maryam, expressed deep gratitude to Alhaji Bello and his entire family for their rare act of compassion, describing it as “a true reflection of faith and forgiveness.”

    He said, “Words cannot describe our appreciation to the Bello family for this gesture of mercy and reconciliation. We continue to pray that something positive may yet emerge from this regrettable tragedy, that our families may heal, and that these children will grow up knowing love from both sides of their family.”

    The two families stated that they have chosen forgiveness, compassion, and faith over pain and have committed to working together to raise the children in an atmosphere of peace and love.

  • Court orders woman accused of killing husband to enter defence

    A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Maitama has ordered a woman, Maryam Sanda, to enter defence in her ongoing trial on murder charge, in which she is, among others, accused of killing her husband, Bilyaminu Bello.

    Justice Yusuf Halilu, in a ruling yesterday, rejected Mrs. Sanda’s no-case submission and rejected her prayer to be discharged and acquitted.

    Justice Halilu upheld the no-case submission by Mrs. Sanda’s three co-defendants and discharged and acquitted them on the grounds that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against them.

    Mrs. Sanda allegedly stabbed her husband, who was said to be a nephew of a former Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Haliru Bello, to death in Abuja on November 19, 2017.

    She was arraigned with her mother, Maimuna Aliyu; her brother, Aliyu Sanda; and their house help, Sadiya Aminu.

    The prosecution had charged Mrs. Sanda with culpable homicide, and offence punishable by death, under Section 221 of the Penal Code Act.

    The other three – Mrs. Aliyu, Sanda and Miss Aminu- were charged with causing the “evidence of the offence to disappear” by “cleaning the blood from the scene of crime with the intention” of shielding her “from legal punishment.”

    The offence is said to be punishable under Section 167 of the Penal Code Act.

    Read also: Sexual assault: Court grants teacher N500,000 bail

    At the closure of the prosecution’s case, the defendants made no-case submissions on which the court ruled yesterday.

    The prosecution closed its case on January 22, after calling six witnesses.

    Justice Halilu, in his ruling, said: “The no-case submission of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants is hereby upheld and they are hereby discharged and acquitted.

    “The submission of no-case to answer by Maryam Sanda, the first defendant, is overruled. I call on the first defendant to enter her defence.”

    According to Justice Halilu, the preponderance of evidence adduced by the prosecution, through its six witnesses, created “a thick cloud”, warranting the 1st defendant to present her own side of the case.

    The judge adjourned till May 6 for Sanda to present her case.

     

  • Maryam Sanda, mother, two others arraigned for alleged murder of ex-PDP chair’s son

    A FORMER Aso Savings Executive Director, Hajia Maimuna Aliyu and her daughter and son – Maryam Sanda and Aliyu Sanda – as well as Sadiya Aminu were arraigned yesterday before Justice Yusuf Halilu of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court sitting in Jabi, Abuja.

    They were charged for the murder of Bilyamin Muhammed Bello, the son of ex-People’s Democratic Party (PDP) National Chairman, Alhaji Bello Halliru Muhammad.

    The police had earlier filed murder charges against Mariam Sanda for allegedly murdering her husband at their home in Abuja.

    But yesterday arraignment came after police amended a charge at the end of their preliminary investigation.

    In count one of the amended charges, police alleged that Maryam had caused the death of her husband “by stabbing him on the chest and other parts of the body with a knife and other dangerous weapons, which eventually led to his death”.

    It was alleged in the second count that the former Executive Director of Aso Savings and Loans and Sadiya Aliyu, with the knowledge that a murder had been committed, “cause evidence of the offence to disappear”.

    However, the defendants pleaded not guilty to the two count charges read to them in court.

    After the charges were read to them, their defence counsel, Mr. Joseph Daudu (SAN), urged the court to grant the defendant bail, noting that Maryam Sanda is a nursing mother.

    “My lord, the defendant has a six-month-old baby; the child’s care is at stake. She should enjoy the benefit of bail so that both lives can be secured,” the lawyer said.

    Daudu added that the defendant was anxious to clear her name.

    In reaction to the application filed by their defence counsel, police prosecutor Mr. James Idachaba opposed to both oral and formal bail applications.

    “I have sympathy for her eight-month-old baby but I don’t think that should count in the face of law for her to be released on bail.

    “But as for Maimuna, Aliyu and Sadiya, I will leave the issue of bail to the discretion of the court,” Idachaba said.

    He also noted that the defendants should be in prison pending their trial.

    After listening to both parties, the trial judge refused and dismiss the bail application for the first defendant.

    Justice Halilu refused to grant her bail because no competent reason has been brought by the defence counsel to show that the ailment she is suffering from cannot be treated in Suleja prison

    He also added that the defence counsel did not give reasons why the prison authorities lack facilities to care of Maryam and her baby.

    Justice Halilu said the fact that she has a baby was not stressed in the aforementioned sections of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA)

    But for the second to fourth defendants, the trial judge ordered that they must produce two sureties who reside in Abuja.

    He added that the remaining defendants standing trial should deposit their international passport and travel documents to the court registrar .

    “Each of the sureties shall deposit their landed documents to the court,” the judge said.

    The matter was adjourned till February 5, 2018 for continuation of trial.

  • ‘Husband-killer’ Maryam Sanda denied bail

    ‘Husband-killer’ Maryam Sanda denied bail

    •Returned to Suleja prison 

    Justice Yusuf Halilu of the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Jabi, Abuja, yesterday refused the oral application for bail made on behalf of Maryam Sanda, and ordered her returned to Suleja prison pending her re-arraignment next Thursday.

    “I will not grant her bail; all arguments about her bail shall be taken together at the next adjourned date when other co-defendants will be in court. Therefore, the defendant shall be taken back to prison, he said.

    At the last adjourned date, the FCT Police Command, in a two-count charge, accused Maryam, daughter of a former Executive Director of Aso Savings and Loans, Hajiya Maimuna Aliyu Sanda, of killing her husband, Bilyamin Bello, the son of Alhaji Bello Haliru Muhammad, a former chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    The police said Maryam caused Bello’s death “by stabbing him on the chest with a broken bottle; this you did with the knowledge that your act is likely to cause his death.”

    Upon her arraignment on November 24, the court ordered that she be remanded in prison after she pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    But yesterday, Police Prosecutor James Idachaba told the court of an amended charge before the court, which added Maryam’s mother, Maimuna Aliyu, and two others,  as defendants.

    He, however, said efforts to serve Maimuna and others were unsuccessful, urging the court to adjourn till next Thursday to enable the police bring all defendants to court to take their pleas.

    Maryam’s new lawyer Chief Joseph Daudu (SAN) urged the court to listen to the bail application filed on her behalf.

    He also made an oral bail application, pleaded with Justice Halilu to release Maryam on temporary bail, saying the prison condition was unwholesome for Maryam’s six-month-old baby.

    “It is unfortunate that a life has been lost already, but we should not take more lives,” he pleaded.

    But with another objection by the police prosecutor, Justice Halilu held that he is not disposed to grant the oral application since issues have been joined on the formal application for bail.

    But Justice Halilu ruled in favour of the prosecutor, saying the bail would be taken after the re-arraignment.

    “The defendant, in the mean time, shall be returned to the prison pending Thursday, December 14,” the judge said.

    He earlier ordered Maryam’s daughter, who is in the custody of a relative, taken out of court for crying.

  • Murder: Police assures of transparent investigation

    Murder: Police assures of transparent investigation

    The FCT Police Command has assured that it would transparent in the investigation of the murder case of Bilyaminu Bello Haliru.

    Haliru was allegedly murdered by his wife, Maryam Sanda in his residence at Wuse 2 area of Abuja.

    The Command while revealing that Sanda has been charged with the offence of culpable homicide added that some people have been invited for questioning.

    The Command also disclosed that it has secured two weeks remand order from the FCT High Court in respect of the suspect, Maryam Sanda pending the completion of the investigation.

    The Police explained that the two weeks remand order was because the suspect has a six months old baby which makes it difficult to remand her in prison custody with the child.

    This is contained in a statement in Abuja on Wednesday by the Command Spokesman, DSP Anjuguri Manzah.

    The statement reads: “As a result of rumour and insinuation going round in the public domain, the FCT Police Command wishes to avail the Media and members of the public with the following facts on the on-going investigation of the suspected murder of Bilyaminu Bello Haliru which occurred on 19th November, 2017 at about 0350hrs in his residence  no. 4 Pakali close Wuse2.

    “The Command has secured a remand order for two weeks from the FCT High Court in respect of the suspect Maryam Sanda pending the completion of the investigation and also because the suspect has a six months old baby which make it difficult to remand her in prison custody with the child.

    “The case has been assigned to FCT High Court No. 32 Jabi FCT Abuja for trial by the Chief Judge of FCT and charges have been filed.

    “The suspect has been charged with the offence of Culpable Homicide punishable under section 221 of the Penal Code”.

    The statement further reads: “It should also be noted that this present charge is as a result of preliminary findings; at the end of investigation additional findings will determine whether the current charge will be amended or whether other persons will be charged along with the suspect.

    “To assist the police with its ongoing investigation, some persons have been invited for questioning on the matter”.

    The Command while promising to keep the public abreast of any further development added that investigation would be done professionally.