Ai Ahmadu Rungumawa V. Hantsi Muh’d Rungumawa (2001)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, J.C.A.

The appellant in this court Mrs. Ai Ahmadu Rungumawa filed a petition against her husband Muhammad Na Hantsi seeking for the dissolution of their six years old marriage on the grounds that her husband (the respondent before us) does not pray and he does not feed or clothe her and again he caused her to be arrested and detained on the alleged fornication with one of her brothers who came to pay salah homage to her mother. She spent a night in the police custody but later she was released on the order of the court.

The respondent therein denied the petition of the appellant and stated his own case denying specifically the allegation of failing to perform the prayer (salat). He confirmed that he reported the matter of adultery to the police and she was arrested but later released. He urged the court to order the appellant to return to his house. But If she insisted on the dissolution of their marriage he demanded for thirty thousand naira (N30,000)as the amount he spent on her.

The husband to the appellant’s mother came to court and testified that for the past seven months he was responsible for feeding and clothing both the mother of the appellant and herself. He told the court that he knows that the appellant is married to the respondent.

During the application of I,zar, the appellant said that he does not clothe her and the only one wrapper she was wearing was snatched and seized from her by the respondent, it was the court that intervened and ordered the respondent to return it to her.

The court then turned to the respondent and asked him if he has a witness or witnesses who can testify to the fact that the appellant’s mother invited one Iliya and Sada and put one of them in a room with his wife, Ai, and the mother of the appellant stood by the gate so that no one will get in. The respondent told the court that he has three witnesses to call they are:-

Altahiru, Baran and Usman Abdu. Three officers of the court openly in court testified to the fact that the respondent in an answer to the question put to him by the court said:

“he has witnesses to testify that his wife has committed adultery with one Iliya in the room of his wife’s mother, and that they are both FASIKUN Transgressors).?”

The respondent could not call any witness to confirm what he said about adultery, he only begged the court to cause his wife to go back to their matrimonial home.

The trial court rejected the evidence of the husband of the appellant’s mother because of their close relationship. He relied on the provisions of an Islamic book on Sharia called RISAIA.

The lower Sharia Court Judge entered judgment in favour of the petitioner Madam Ai and the marriage was dissolved after rebuking and reprimanding the respondent for making this wild allegation against his mother-in-law which allegation he cannot substantiate. The court then declared three months ldda period from 27th June, 2000.

Dissatisfied with the decision of the lower Sharia Court, the respondent herein appealed to the Upper Sharia Court Gwadabawa.

In the Upper Sharia Court, the decision of the trial court was set aside and the appeal allowed on the grounds that the trial court decided the issue before the evidence was concluded. It is clear also that that court did not properly evaluate the principles of Islamic law on the issues of feeding, clothing, accommodation, defamation and question of allegation of adultery or fornication. The Upper Sharia Court also rebuffed the trial court for not looking carefully at the Sharia authorities which are within the knowledge of any Judge of the Area Courts. The decisions of that lower Sharia Court are contrary to the dictate of Sharia. The Upper Sharia Court then ordered a trial denovo before the Judge of the lower Sharia Court.

The appellant was aggrieved by the decision of the Upper Sharia Court and lodged an appeal before the Sharia Court of Appeal Sokoto State. After considering the records of proceedings of both Upper and Lower Sharia Courts and after applying I,ZAR the court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Upper Sharia Court.