n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Suleman V. COP (2008) CLR 3(a) (SC)

Judgement delivered on March 7th 2008.

Brief

  • Bail

Facts

The two Appellants were arrested and detained at Garga police station in Plateau State for armed robbery sometime in October, 2002. They were later transferred to Jos Police Headquarters and then to Jos CID where they were detained for quite sometime before they were arraigned before the Chief Magistrate Court, Jos on 11th December, 2002. They then caused to be issued a summon to admit them to bail pending trial at the Jos High Court. The Application was supported with a 5 paragraph affidavit.

Paragraph 3 of the supporting affidavit deposed to by one Sarah Ibrahim. Litigation Secretary, in the law firm of the Appellants' Counsel, reads as follows:-

  • 3
    That I have been informed by the Appellants in Jos prison on 9/3/2003 at 12.00 noon while briefing A.A. Sangei Esq., of Counsel and verily believe their information to be true:
  • a
    That the Appellants were arrested and detained at Garga Police Station for alleged offence of Armed Robbery sometimes in October 2002.
  • b
    That they were later transferred to Jos Police Headquarters and finally transferred to Jos CID. where there were detained for a longtime.
  • c
    That the Appellants did not commit the alleged offence on the F.I.R. A copy of the F.I.R. is hereby annexed and marked as Exhibit "A".
  • d
    That the Appellants were subsequently arraigned before the Chief Magistrate Court II, Jos on the 11/12/2003 after staying at C.I.D. Jos for a long time.
  • e
    That the Chief Magistrate Court II Jos ordered for the remand of the Applicants at the Jos prison. The proceedings are annexed hereto and market as Exhibit "B".
  • f
    That the Appellants have been in prison since 11/12/2002.
  • g
    That the Respondent is not willing to prosecute the Applicants. That the Respondent only want the Applicants to be detained in prison custody without prosecution.
  • h
    That the Applicants will not jump bail, they will also appear in Court for their case.
  • i
    That the Applicants will not interfere with proper police investigation in case any is remaining.
  • j
    That the Appellants will provide credible and reliable surety/suretie'as this Honourable Court may order."

    • The application was opposed and to that end, a 15 paragraph counter affidavit deposed to by one Joseph Chinda, an Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) attached to the Special Anti-Robbery Section, C.I.D. Plateau State Police Command, Jos.

    The application thereafter came up for hearing before Damulak, J., sitting at Jos High Court. After taking submissions from learned Counsel for the parties, delivered his reserved ruling on 20th October, 2003. The learned Judge, after reviewing all the issues raised in the matter, came to the conclusion that there was no merit in the application. He therefore dismissed it. He said as follows in the concluding paragraph of his said ruling:-

    • "In the circumstances, I find that the application does not succeed and is hereby dismissed. It is ordered that investigation into the matter be stepped up and the Applicants be charged before the High Court forthwith."

      • The Appellants were dissatisfied with the ruling and their appeal to the Court of Appeal Jos Division was dismissed. This is an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal (hereinafter referred to as Court below.

    Issues

    Whether or not the Court of Appeal exercised its discretion judicially...

    Read More