News

December 8, 2016

Ukpo/Abagana land dispute: Court grants Nwude, another bail

By Vincent Ujumadu

Awka—AFTER nearly four months in detention, an Anambra High Court sitting in Awka yesterday granted bail to millionaire businessman, Chief Emmanuel Nwude and one other person, who were arrested after the destruction of police property situated on the disputed land between Ukpo and Abagana communities of Anambra State.

A security guard was killed and property worth millions of naira destroyed during the attack on the police post.

Nwude and about 23 other Abagana indigenes were arrested by the Police August 19, 2016 for their alleged complicity in the attack and were subsequently charged for conspiracy, murder, arson and attempted murder.

Nwude’s lawyer, O.J. Nnadi, SAN, had approached the court to grant his clients bail, arguing that his client was being held in police custody without proper arraignment.

When the bail application was mentioned yesterday, Nnadi told the court that he had filed an affidavit for the release of his clients on the basis that they had not been convicted and could therefore not be detained perpetually by the police.

He assured the court that there was no evidence that the suspects would jump bail and urged the court to grant them bail, adding that it was improper to continue to detain them when they had not been properly charged to court.

He also pointed that the police in their report, did not indict his clients, especially Nnadezie Kelechi who, he said, was just a fuel pump attendant and non indigenes of the community and therefore had nothing to do with the communal crisis.

Objecting to the application, the state counsel, Mr. Don Adizue said his 12-paragraph affidavit contained basis for which the accused should remain in detention, even as he stated that granting them bail was at the discretion of the court.

In his ruling, Justice D.C. Mmaduechesi said the state did not show evidence of its claim that it had filed additional information on the accused persons and held that keeping them in detention ran foul of Section 36(a)(b) of the 1999 constitution, which said that nobody should be incarcerated before his alleged offence is proved and that any accused person deserved time and facility to prepare his defence.