Court Restrains IGP, Four Others from Further Harassing Housewife, in-law

An Abuja Federal High Court has issued an order restraining the Inspector-General of Police and four others from further harassing, intimidating, humiliating and detaining an Abuja-based housewife and her in-law.

The court gave the order in a ruling on an ex-parte order argued by their counsel, Akintayo Balogun of Oxygen Chambers, on behalf of Mrs. Esther Stephanie Shehu and Mr. David Isaac Kpanaki (1st and 2nd applicants) seeking an order restraining the Inspector-General of Police and four others from carrying out the acts complained of in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1279/2023.

Cited as respondents in the suit are the inspector General of Police ( IGP); Nigerian Police Force; Commissioner of Police, Kwara state; Superintendent Sadiq Sule; and Dr. Kamoru Yusuf (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th respondents, respectively).

In a certified true copy of an enrollment dated, October 4, 2023, sighted on Thursday, Justice M. O. Olajuwon ordered the parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum pending the determination of the substantive case. The court further ordered their production in court for the

Respondents to show cause why they should not be admitted to bail.

Justice Olajuwon gave an order restraining 1st to 4th Respondents (jointly or severally) whether by themselves, their agents, employees, operatives, detectives, investigating officer(s), or by whatever name called, from further harassing, arresting the applicants pending the determination of the suit.

In the substantive suit, Mrs. Shehu and her in-law, Mr. Kpanaki, are seeking the enforcement of their fundamental rights against the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and the four others over their (Mrs. Shehu and Mr. Kpanaki’s) alleged unlawful arrest, dehumanization and detention without warrant. They are seeking an order of the court declaring the actions of the defendants illegal as well as an order for their immediate and unconditional release and an order restraining the defendants from further arresting, dehumanizing and detaining them, among others.

Alternatively, the applicants are demanding an order for their admittance on bail on self-recognition or other favourable terms, an order for the publications of a public apology to the applicants by the respondents in ThisDay, Sun and Leadership newspapers and payment of N10 billion compensation to the applicants by the respondents as exemplary damages.

In the supporting affidavit deposed to by Blessing Ijomah, Litigation Secretary in the law firm of Oxygen Chambers, (Counsel to the applicants), Esther Stephanie Shehu and David Isaac Kpanaki (1st and 2nd applicants, respectively) said that on August 2, 2023, around 8:30 am while they were at their home at Gwarimpa, FCT, Abuja, police officers invaded their house in a gestapo manner to arrest the husband of the 1st applicant, Mr. Ibrahim Shehu, but did not meet him at home.

They said his planned arrest was instigated and sponsored by Kamoru Yusuf (the 5th respondent), who was involved in a civil business transaction with Mr. Shehu.

“The officers promised to return on a later time of the day to pick up her husband or they will have her arrested in his place,” the affidavit said.

The same day, around 3:00 pm, the officers came back to the house of the applicants and when they did not meet Esther’s husband again, they arrested her and Mr. Kpanaki in place of Mr. Shehu.

They protested their arrest as no warrant was shown to them either and there had never been any transaction between them and Mr. Yusuf but the officers turned deaf ears to their protest and took them away.

They were thereafter allegedly handcuffed jointly and hauled to the boot of the police Hilux car and moved to Ilorin, Kwara State, in that dehumanizing condition.

They were detained in the police cell from August 2, to August 4, before they were subsequently charged before a Magistrate Court in Ilorin on a First Information Report (FIR) on allegations bordering on cheating, screening an offender and obstruction of police from discharging their lawful duties.

The applicants alleged that while in custody, they were subjected to torture and degrading treatments.

“They were thereafter remanded at the Mandala Correctional Centre, Ilorin, Kwara State by the Order of His Worship, Ibrahim Muhammad and the court refused to grant them bail despite being offences that are ordinarily bailable,” the applicants said in the affidavit.

When the matter came up at the Magistrate’s Court on August 15, the prosecuting counsel representing the Police informed the court that there was a signal from the Nigerian Police, Abuja Headquarters, that the FIR be terminated and that the case file be brought to Abuja alongside the applicants.

To this day, the Ilorin Magistrate’s Court has not yet ruled on the application made by the Prosecuting counsel in compliance with the order from Abuja.

Rather, the case file on the matter was transferred to the State Ministry of Justice for advice of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), who advised that the applicants be charged before a court of competent jurisdiction.

On September 12, the applicants were withdrawn from Madala Correctional Centre by the State Intelligence Bureau where they have continued to be detained “without any warrant to do so, without any court order and contrary to the application to have the First Information Report terminated by the prosecuting counsel or the case file transferred to Abuja.

“The action of the respondents has placed the applicants in untold hardship, separation from their immediate families who have been left alone to cater for themselves, all in lieu of another person.”

The applicants said the acts of the police and Kamoru Yusuf amount to an infringement of the applicants’ fundamental right as guaranteed under the Constitution and the African Charter.

“In view of the facts deposed to in the preceding paragraph, the applicants are entitled to enforce their fundamental right against the respondents.”.

The applicants therefore approached the court for enforcement of their fundamental rights.

Meanwhile the matter has been adjourned to October 10 for hearing and for the Respondents to produce the Applicants in court and show cause why they should not be admitted to bail.