..Absent from Court, As Osun Govt Attempts to Take Over case
There was a turn of event before the Federal High Court, Osogbo over the criminal defamation of character levelled against the Special Adviser to Governor Ademola Adeleke on Political Matters, Mr Muniru Adebayo Raji as he refused to show up for arraignment before the court.
His lawyer, Naim Adekilekun Esq informed the court, presided over by Hon. Justice Ayo Emmanuel that the defendant was terribly sick and battling with chronic ulcer, hence he could not appear before the court for arraignment.
Former Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Prince Adebayo Adeleke (BANIK) had filed a petition to the police on criminal defamation of his character against Muniru that he falsely accused him on a Radio Programme of securing contract from the government of Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola and absconded with the contract sum without executing it.
When Charge No: FHC/OS/60C/2024 between IGP Vs Alhaji Munirudeen Adebayo Raji was called for arraignment, the defendant’s counsel, Naim Adekilekun told the court that a letter had been written to the prosecution to the effect that the Governor Adeleke’s aide was sick and could not show up in court.
He said the sickness became worse this morning, as a result of which he then wrote a letter to the court.
Meanwhile, the State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Oluwole Jimi-Bada informed the court that his office wanted to take over the case, relying on Section 174 of the 1999 constitution.
But the Prosecuting Counsel, Mr Baokun Francis Osei opposed the application on the ground that cyber stocking is a Federal offence and he was not aware of any Fiat from the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice.
According to him, his further findings revealed that no any fiat was received by the Police Headquarters in Abuja from the office of the AGF, arguing that the section 174 being rely upon by Jimi-Bada is only applicable to the office of the AGF.
He further argued that the issue of Fiat was premature at this stage, as no arraignment had taken place to give court jurisdiction over the matter.
Osei also contended that the non-appearance of the accused person (Muniru) was deliberate to prevent his arraignment, saying the letter presented by his counseel could not stand in for the diagnosis report that can show whether he was truly sick.
He further stated that he had been earlier served with an application for bail by Muniru’s counsel to show that the day was for arraignment, saying the defendant was just deliberate in frustrating his arraignment.
Counsel for the Complaint, Barrister Muideen Adeoye Galadima also appeared in court to watch brief for the nominal client (BANIK).
The court then adjourned to June 3, 2024 for ruling on the arguments of counsels.
