A Federal High Court in Abuja has set a date of Nov. 2 for a decision on a preliminary objection contesting its authority to hear a criminal case involving document falsification by a lawyer and his accomplices.
Barr. Everistus Ugwuowo, 39, and three other people were charged by the police with 11 counts in 2018 for allegedly falsifying documents related to a property in Gwarinpa, Abuja.
The issue was based on a report by a woman named Mrs. Grace Audu.
Umar Adamu, 41, Usman Audu, 49, and Adole Christopher, 29, are the further suspects.
They were alleged to have
conspired to create a fake “Deed of Assignment” pertaining to the property.
According to reports, the primary suspect and his accomplices sold Mr. Grema Umar’s property at House 11, 662 Road, Gwarinpa 2, Estate, Abuja, without having the required authorization.
Other documents that the suspects are suspected of forging include an Offer Letter, a paperwork for the property with the number FHA/OCE/GWA 2 OWU C, an Irrevocable Power of Attorney, a letter of owner occupier checking in that purports to be signed by Grema Umar, as well as other receipts.
They were accused of defrauding their victim of N29 million by pretending to have the power to sell the residence, a crime to which they all entered not guilty pleas at the start of the trial.
When the primary suspect (Ugwuowo) was asked to return all the money he had taken from his victim, who had later realised the transaction was fake, the suspect is alleged to have sent a dishonoured cheque.
They were accused by the police of forgery, conspiring to conduct a felony, and receiving money under false pretences, which is against Section 8 of the Advance fee fraud and other similar offences Act 2006.
The suspects were also alleged to have violated Section 1(1) and committed an offence punishable by Sections 1(3) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences Act 2006 and Sections 3(6) and 1(2)(C) of the Miscellaneous Offences Act CAP M17 Law of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN) 2004.
The suspects were also accused of violating Section 1(1) of the Dishonoured Cheque Act, CAP D11 LFN 2004, by issuing a dishonoured cheque.
Justice Egwuatu Obiora postponed the case’s resumed hearing until November 2 in order to rule on a preliminary objection contesting the court’s authority to hear the matter.
A challenge to the court’s authority to hear the case had been filed, Mr. Ebuka Agwu, counsel for the second defendant (Adamu), had informed the court.
Agwu claims that because only the Attorney-General of the Federation has the authority to do so, the police lack the legal support necessary to present such a case before a court.
He used Sections 104 to 106 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) to back up his claims.
Counsel for the first, third, and fourth defendants also aligned themselves with the ACJA’s provision.
He informed the court that a written address had also been submitted to support his claim about certain provisions of the ACJA.
The first defendant’s attorney, Mr. Yomi Olokeogun, previously informed the court that his client, Ugwuowo, couldn’t appear in court because he was a hospital inpatient due to high blood pressure.
A copy of the medical report that was received from the hospital and presented to the court, according to Olokeogun, serves as proof of his client’s actual situation.
Since his client was not there, he begged the court to use its discretion in making a decision.
The prosecution attorney had already asked the court to reject the medical report since it was not produced by a recognised government hospital.
Additionally, he urged the court to reject the preliminary objection, pointing out that the trial has been subject to pointless adjournments ever since it started.
