Olabode Olaniran V. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2016) LLJR-CA

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ABIMBOLA OSARUGUE OBASEKI-ADEJUMO, J.C.A.

This is a bail application dated 22nd of February, 2016 filed on the 23rd February, 2016 on behalf of OLABODE OLANIRAN admitting him to bail on very liberal terms pending the determination of the appeal against his conviction and sentencing to 12 years imprisonment by the lower Court, on four grounds that there is an existing appeal, which raises substantial grounds of law and that the applicant had been on bail before the conviction in the lower Court and did not jump bail or interfere with the prosecution of the case. Also, that similar application had been filed before the lower Court but could not be heard before the appeal was entered in to the Court of appeal, and finally it is in the interest of justice to admit the applicant to bail.

The application is supported by a ten paragraph affidavit deposed to by Mike Ogie, a legal practitioner in the law office of Femi Atoyebi & Co. filed together with an enrolled order of the judgment, and a notice of appeal of 30 grounds. The application is further supported by a six paragraph further-affidavit of 17th June 2016. Attached to it is the application filed

1

at the lower Court (Federal High Court) and a 2nd further affidavit of seven paragraphs dated 17/6/2016, accompanied by a written address.

The Respondent filed a counter affidavit of seven paragraphs against the application on 23/6/2016 and a written address.

The sole issue identified by both parties is similar and can be summed up thus:
“whether this is a proper case in which this Court should exercise its discretion in favor of the Applicant by admitting him to bail on liberal terms pending the determination of the appeal.”

Learned silk, Femi Atoyebi SAN, for the Appellant/Applicant submitted that the applicant has never breached the terms of bail granted by the lower Court pending conviction and that the offence is not a capital one but bailable on liberal terms. He referred to Section 165 (1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 which states that bail shall be at the discretion of the Court with due regard to the circumstances of the case and shall not be excessive. He referred to DOKUBO ASARI v. F.R.N. (2007) 12 NWLR (Pt. 1048) 349; MUNIR v. F.R.N. (2009) 16 NWLR (Pt. 1168) 481-498; BAMAIYI v. STATE [2001] 8 NWLR

2

(Pt. 715) 270; MOHAMMED ABACHA v. STATE [2001] 5 NWLR (Pt. 761) 638; SULEIMAN v. C.O.P. (2008) 8 NWLR (Pt. 1089) 298 at 322-323, paras A-H on exceptional circumstances for grant of bail pending appeal and that paragraphs 3 (g), (h), (j) and (k) of the Affidavit shows same.

On constitutionality of bail, he referred to Section 35(1) of the Constitution; ANAKWE v. C.O.P. (1996) 3 NWLR (Pt. 436) 320 at 330, paras F-H. Counsel further submitted that grant of bail must be speedy. He relied on OBEKPA v. C.O.P. (1980) 1 NCR 113 @ 119 LINE 1-3; ODOGU v. A.G, FED. (1996) 6 NWLR (Pt. 456) 508 at 518, G-H; DANBABA v. STATE (2000) 14 NWLR (Pt. 687) 396 at 411; EYU v. STATE (1988) 2 NWLR (Pt. 78) 602.

On the need to adopt liberal approach and discretion to be exercised judicially and judiciously, he relied on DOKUBO-ASARI v. F.R.N. (supra); STATE v. OKAFOR (1964) ENLR 96 362-363.

He submitted that the purpose of granting bail is to enable an accused come back to face his trial and that the Applicant has given an undertaking to continue to be available for the hearing of the appeal. In conclusion, he submitted that there were no medical grounds but

3