Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

FRN V. Maishanu (2019) CLR 1(g) (SC)

Judgement delivered on January 25th 2019

Brief

  • Foreign statutes and laws
  • Bail bond – Forfeiture of and when issue should be raised
  • Bail
  • Section 107 of the Evidence Act 2011
  • Section 215 (1) of the Evidence Act 2011
  • Section 137 of the Criminal Procedure Act
  • Section 119 of the Criminal Procedure Act
  • Section 143 of the Criminal Procedure Act
  • Section 141 of the Criminal Procedure Act
  • Section 137 of the Criminal Procedure Act
  • Section 128 of the Criminal Procedure Act
  • Section 127 of the Criminal Procedure Act
  • Section 122 of the Criminal Procedure Act
  • Section 120 of the Criminal Procedure Act
  • Section 107 of the Evidence Act, 2011
  • Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended)
  • Section 7 (2)(b) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act, 2006

Facts

Facts relevant to this appeal as gleaned from the Record of Appeal are that the 3rd respondent, as an accused person, was arraigned before the Federal High Court, holden at Gusau, on the 16th day of December, 2011 charged with money laundering offence punishable under Section 7 (2)(b) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act, 2006. He pleaded not guilty to the charge. On the 24th of January, 2012, the 3rd respondent was granted bail in the sum of N5m (Five Million Naira only) and two sureties, each, in the like sum.

The 1st and 2nd respondents, herein, stood sureties for the 3rd respondent and each entered into a Bail Bond in the stated sum of five million naira in fulfilment of the bail conditions. Upon execution of bail recognizance by the sureties (1st and 2nd respondents), the 3rd respondent was released from custody.

In the course of trial, the case came up on the 28th of March, 2013, for continuation but the 3rd respondent failed to appear in Court. Further, neither the 1st nor the 2nd of the respondents was in Courtto explain the absence of the 3rd respondent. Thereafter, the operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in execution of the arrest warrant granted by the trial Court, arrested the 3rd respondent and took him to Court on the 29th of April, 2013. The trial Court ordered the 3rd respondent to go back to custody. He remained in custody until judgment was delivered on the 13th day of June, 2013, whereby he was discharged and acquitted of the charge preferred against him.

Meanwhile, the prosecution made an instant oral application for the forfeiture of the bail bond. The learned trial judge directed, however, that the prosecution would better file a formal application to that effect, if desirable. The prosecution filed a Motion on Notice on 2/07/13 for forfeiture of the bail bond/recognizance and joined all the three present respondents as respondents to the application.

In the course of hearing, the said application (of 28/6/13), the appellant's learned counsel applied to the learned trial judge to order for the appearance of the 3rd respondent for cross-examination.

Issues

  • "1.
    Whether the judgment of the Court of Appeal is supportable by the...
    Read More