By Daily Review Online
A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Maitama, Abuja, has fixed June 18 for the commencement of trial in the criminal case instituted against the factional Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Kabiru Tanimu Turaki.
The trial judge, Justice Peter Kekemeke, set the date on Thursday after declining a request by Turaki’s counsel, Abdulaziz Ibrahim (SAN), for an immediate ruling on an application challenging the competence of the charge filed against his client by the Inspector-General of Police (IGP).
Turaki is facing a one-count charge bordering on allegedly providing false information to the IGP through a petition dated October 5, 2022, written on his official letterhead against one Saidu Mohammed Mainasara. Prosecutors alleged that the petition was intended to invoke the lawful powers of the IGP to the detriment or annoyance of Mainasara.
The offence is said to be punishable under Section 140 of the Penal Code Law.
At Thursday’s proceedings, Ibrahim informed the court of a pending application seeking to quash the charge, marked CR/647/2025. He argued that the charge disclosed no prima facie case against Turaki and amounted to an abuse of the court process.
With the court’s permission, Ibrahim moved the application and urged the court to strike out the charge.
In response, prosecuting counsel Usman Rabiu adopted the prosecution’s counter-affidavit and urged the court to dismiss the application, arguing that the prosecution should be allowed to present evidence in support of its case.
Ibrahim further requested that the court deliver its ruling on the application promptly to spare the defendant what he described as an unnecessary trial and the attendant emotional and physical strain.
However, Rabiu opposed the request, relying on Section 396(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), which requires courts to reserve rulings on such applications until the final judgment.
According to him, the provision is mandatory and leaves no room for judicial discretion.
Delivering a brief ruling, Justice Kekemeke agreed with the prosecution, holding that Section 396(2) of the ACJA must be complied with. He added that the defendant would not suffer any injustice by standing trial before the court determines the objection.
Following the agreement of counsel on both sides, the judge adjourned the matter until June 18 for the commencement of trial. The prosecution is expected to call its sole witness on that date.