Follow Us on Google
From Godwin Tsa, Abuja
An Abuja Chief Magistrate Court has admitted Prof. Zainab Abiola and her domestic staff, Rebecca Enechido to bail.
Prof Duke Abiola, alongside her domestic staff were charged for assaulting police orderly attached to her, Inspector Teju Moses.
The Inspector-General of Police, Usman Baba, condemned the alleged assault of a police woman by Prof. Duke- Abiola and her domestic staff comprising the housemaid, Rebecca Enechido, and a male suspect currently at large.
The victim claimed that Duke, an activist, grievously assaulted her in the company of some accomplices on Tuesday, September 20, 2022, at her residence in Garki, Abuja, due to her (policewoman) refusal to breach professional ethics by carrying out menial and domestic chores at her house.
While granting their bail applications, Magistrate Elizabeth Wonu, ordered them to produce two sureties who must be reasonable persons with fixed addresses.
In addition, the sureties must swear to affidavit of means, who must be residents within the jurisdiction of the court.
They must equally show proof whether they are tenant or landlord.
Meanwhile, the defendants were ordered by the court to report to the police FCT command every Monday until November 1, to enable them to be arraigned before a competent court of law.
Magistrate Wonu admitted them to bail after listening to the arguments of both counsel in regard to the bail applications.
The court further held that if the prosecution failed to arraign the defendants within the time stated, the order of court will abate.
Earlier, the Prosecution Counsel, ASP Stanley Nwafoaku informed the court that the prosecution witness,, Ms Teju Moses was not available as she was still recovering from her injuries.
He also added that the Investigating Police Officer ( IPO) was equally not available.
Nwafoaku therefore proceeded to ask for an adjournment.
The defence counsel, Mr Monday Adah in his response, objected to the prayer an adjournment and urged the court to go on with the proceedings.
Adah further informed the court that he had a motion on notice before it dated and filed Sept.26, and served and acknowledged by prosecution on Sept.30.
Nwafoaku said he was aware that the motion was received by his office, but that he had not seen it.
He also prayed the court for a short adjournment to enable him respond to the defendants’ counsel’s motion.
Adah on his part argued that there was no order before the court to detain the defendants for further investigation.
” An additional day will touch on the fundamental rights of the defendants, I urge the court to take our motion as it is ripe for hearing.
The bureaucratic bottle neck in the prosecution’s administration should not be visited on the defendants.
” Hence in the interest of justice, the motion should be taken and not adjourned until another date”, Adah argued
The court in a short ruling stated that the issue was not about non-service and therefore stated that the negligence of prosecution resulting in the prosecutor not been in possession of the motion should not be an issue.
The court therefore directed Adah to proceed with his application.
Adah said the application which was brought in pursuant to section 36 (5) of the construction of Nigeria 1999 as amended and sections 158,162,163 and 165 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act ( ACJA) 2015
He added that the motion seeking for two reliefs was supported by a six-page affidavit deposed to by one Moses John in the law firm of the defence counsel.
The counsel further submitted that in addition to the affidavit was an affidavit of urgency of same 6 paragraphs accompanied by a written address which he urged the court to adopt as his oral argument in the matter.
“I want to adopt my earlier submission on this same application with section 227 and 229 of the penal code, which is the offence of attempt to commit culpable homicide, which the defendants are being arraigned”, the prosecutor submitted.
Nwafoaku in addition stated that the motion did not canvass any new issue and therefore urged the court not to grant the bail application as sought by Adah
Adah reiterated that while section 227 is talking about charge, the police had brought First Information Report (FIR), and that it was subject to the court to draft a charge which had not been done.
He urged the court to set aside the order of the court made on Sept.23.
Nwafoaku said that application if such nature cannot be made orally as there must be reasons stated through an affidavit to enable prosecution respond.
He argued that defence could only respond on point of law and to come with fresh application if they needed the court to set aside the earlier order.
