Abubakar Ali Peters v. The Federal Republic Of Nigeria & Ors (2023)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA, JCA (Delivering the leading judgment)

This is an interlocutory appeal against the ruling of Lagos High Court in suit No: ID/1178C/2015 The Federal Republic of Nigeria and (1) Nadabo Energy Limited (2) Abubakar Ali Peters delivered on the 31st day of October, 2022 wherein the trial court declined to grant the orders prayed for in the appellants motion paper.

Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant and Nadabo Energy Limited are standing trial before the trial court for the offences of obtaining money by false pretences, forgery, and uttering of forged documents since 2015.

They were arraigned for trial on 7th day of October, 2015. The appellant and the 2nd respondent were standing trial for similar offences in charge No: ID/118C/2012.

On 28th September, 2022, the appellant brought a motion before the trial court presided over by Justice S. S. Ogunsanya for an order seeking the release of his International Passport to him to enable him travel abroad for Medical Treatment.

The 1st respondent opposed the application and filed a counter-affidavit dated 7/10/2022 as well as a written address. The 1st respondent also filed further and better affidavit on 14/10/2022.

In a considered ruling, the trial court on 31/10/2022 refused the application.

And without any application the trial court suo motu revoked the perfected bail the appellant had enjoyed since the commencement of his trial and the conditions which he had never violated.

The appellant who is dissatisfied with the ruling of the trial court appealed to this court.

The learned counsel for the appellant formulated three (3) issues for the determination of the appeal. The issues are reproduced as follows:-

(1) Whether the unsolicited revocation of the appellants bail by the trial court in the course of determining an application for the release of his International Passport to travel abroad to take care of his health was in accord with the dictates of Justice and the existing law and whether this decision did not hereby breach the appellants right to fair hearing and presumption of innocence guaranteed by section 36 of the 1999 Constitution. (Distilled from grounds 1 and 3 of the grounds of appeal).

(2) Whether the trial court was correct in law particularly the provisions of the 1999 Constitution when it ceded its judicial powers to the prosecution to assume an adjudicatory role and thereby participate in the determination of the strictly judicial question of whether the appellant has fulfilled the bail conditions granted by the court. (Distilled from ground 4 of the grounds of appeal).

(3) Whether the trial Judge failed to properly exercise her discretion when she refused the grant of the appellants application praying for a temporary return of the appellants Passport to him so that he could proceed abroad for urgent medical consultation. (Distilled from ground 2 of the grounds of appeal).

In his own case, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent also formulated three (3) issues for the determination of the appeal.