Follow Us on Google
From Emmanuel Adeyemi, Lokoja
A Lokoja division of the High Court Friday discharged and acquitted a former Bursar with the Kogi State College of Education, (Technical ) Kabba Dr Usman Mohammed accused of embezzling N88 Million belonging to the institution.
Dr Mohammed, (first defendant) alongside the Registrar Mr John Amobeda (Second defendant) were standing trial on a six count charge bordering on offences relating to misappropriation of funds , conspiracy , criminal breach of trust, cheating and forgery punishable under section 97(2), 315, 322, 364 and 309 of the Kogi State penal code.
Delivering her judgement, Justice Esther Haruna held that in criminal trials, the burden is always on the prosecution to prove it’s case beyond reasonable doubt and that , the prosecution has woefully failed to prove it’s case against the first and second defendant on each of the six count charges.
Part of the court judgment reads; “As rightly submitted by the learned counsel to the first defendant, M. A. Akande Esq., by the nature of the allegations levied against them should be founded on documents.
“DW2 admitted this fact when he told the court in cross-examination that “the allegation of criminal breach of trust, manipulation of payroll and diversion of funds are supposed to be evidenced by documents.
“Exhibits P1 P2a to P2i were merely dumped on the court without linking them to the specific aspects of the prosecution’s case for which the documents were so tendered.
“The court in Okereke U. Umahi (2016) ; LPELR — 40035 (SC) held thus:any party tendering documentary evidence has a task of linking such documents to specific aspects of his case for which such documents so tendered by leading evidence of the purport of the document in relation to the aspect of his case.
“In other words, he should not merely dump them in the court or tribunal and expect the tribunal or court to embark on speculations in determining the purport for which it was tendered or to which aspect of the case such document relates, without being guided by any oral evidence led in open court.
“The defendants were said to have dishonestly manipulated the payroll of staff of the institution by inserting fictitious names to their advantage and diverted the sum of N88 Million Naira entrusted to them to their own personal use.
” Curiously, the said payroll with the fictitious names was not tendered in proof of this charge by the prosecution. None of the invoices and other documents alleged to have been forged by the defendant(s) were tendered in proof of the charge of forgery. None of the essential ingredients of the above two charges of cheating and forgery was established.
“For the 1 and 2™ count charges of conspiracy to commit breach of trust and criminal breach of trust, there is nothing in the whole gamut of the prosecution evidence to show that the amount of N88 Million was entrusted to the defendants.
“From his (1st defendant) extra judicial statement exhibit 4a, the sum of N60 Million was paid into the college account and that he is not in the Governing Council who authorize payment. He explained how N40 Million was disbursed to pay contractors at the permanent site and N20 Million used also to pay contractors at the temporary site.
“The burden always is on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, it is not for the accused to prove his innocence. The 1st defendant in his statement said the sum of N2.8 Million was transferred to his account for onward transmission to Mr. Bashir.
“The question that bothered my mind is, from where was the N2.8 Million taken from and added to their salary account? It should be borne in mind that there is no evidence to show that any N88 Million was entrusted to the defendants.
“In exhibit 4e, the 1st defendant stated that all monies paid in by Amos Lawal that do not belong to Bashir are his genuine money which Amos transferred into his account. It is for the prosecution to Clarify the doubt in the above Prosecution evidence.
“It is not for the court to guess or congesture but for the prosecution to establish the ingredients of the offences charged, particularly the first and second charges of conspiracy and criminal breach of trust, beyond reasonable doubt.
“For the 5th and 6th charges of conspiracy and criminal misappropriation of N30,100,000.00, none of the ingredients of the offences was established by the prosecution.”
Consequently, the trial judge therefore threw away the case for lack of merit and diligent prosecution and discharged and acquitted the Bursar
