Home » News » Appeal Court frees Erastus Akingbola of N47.5billion burglary charge

Appeal Court frees Erastus Akingbola of N47.5billion burglary charge

The Court of Appeal sitting in Lagos, western Nigeria, has quashed a 22-count assign brought opposite a former Managing Director of Intercontinental Bank Plc, Dr. Erastus Akingbola by a Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The EFCC had purported that Akingbola stole N47.5 billion belonging to a bank.

Ruling on Akingbola’s focus on jurisdiction, a probity presided over by Justice Amina Augie hold that a High Court of Lagos State presided over by Justice Lateef Lawal-Akapo lacked office to perform a fit filed opposite him by a commission.

Justice Augie pronounced it amounted to miscarriage of probity for a reduce probity to have discharged Akingbola’s focus severe a office on a matter.

“The interest is commendable and allowed,” she declared.

“I am assured that a reduce probity refused to align itself with a preference of this probity in Nwosu’s case,” she serve held.

Akingbola and his co-defendant, Bayo Dada, had filed dual apart applications severe a office of a probity to hear a 22-count assign filed opposite them by a EFCC.

But, a reduce court, in a statute on 2 May, 2014 discharged their applications.

Justice Lawal-Akapo had afterwards hold that a charges elite opposite a defendants were within a cunning and office to determine.

Dissatisfied with a statute of a high court, Akingbola and Dada approached a Appeal Court, praying that a hearing court’s preference be set aside.

Delievering a judgement, Justice Augie announced that a reduce probity fell into critical blunder by not abiding by a preference on Nwosu’s box adding, “it is many astray and is an injustice”.

According to her, a reduce probity has no choice than to follow a preference of a aloft probity on Nwosu’s case.

“The indicate contingency be done that a preference of this probity in Nwosu’s box was formed on explanation of evidence.”

The decider remarkable that all a charges opposite a defendants arose out of collateral marketplace transactions.

“Only sovereign high probity is conferred with a disdainful office to try cases of collateral marketplace transaction,” she stressed.

The appellate probity hold that a reduce probity owes it a avocation to review and contrariety a papers cited by parties.

“It is a avocation to inspect materials brought before him. It is a purpose of a decider to do probity in adjudicating all a cases brought before him.

“One sided probity would volume to misapplication and favoring one side.

“The explanation of justification was there though a hearing decider during a reduce probity indicted a defendants of not furnishing him with a documents.

“He has unsuccessful in his duty.”

Justice Augie serve hold that a interest filed by a defendants has zero to do with evidence, observant that a reduce probity unsuccessful to go by justification canvassed before it insincere office on a matter.

She emphasised that a emanate of office should not have been toyed with by a reduce court.

“I determine with a appellant that a reduce probity ought to have left by a explanation of evidence.

“There is no approach a assign of hidden can mount but going by a explanation of evidence,” she declared.

Comments

comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

%d bloggers like this: