A petroleum marketer, Murtala Musa who is facing contempt of court and other criminal charges at the Chief Magistrate Court II Minna, has applied for a subpoena of the magistrate compelling the appearance of a judge of the State High Court 3, Justice Mariya Mummy Ismail and the registrar of the court to testify as witnesses and provide four essential evidence documents for the commencement of hearing on the matter.
Musa was arraigned on a three-count charge of contempt of court, criminal intimidation, resisting arrest and assault contrary to Sections 397,152,171 and 265 of the penal code law.
He applied for the subpoena on the judicial officers through his counsel, Barrister D T Tahimber, citing Section 84(2) of the evidence act 2011 as amended.
Tahimber argued that having assumed jurisdiction to entertain the case of contempt allegedly committed at the High Court 3, the magistrate, Fati Umar Hassan, has the inherent powers to make available to the accused all documents necessary for his defense in the case at the commencement of hearing.
The defence counsel explained that it was vital and competent for the High Court judge to appear before the magistrate court and for her court registrar to produce records of proceedings of the suit NSHC/266/2016 duly signed by Justice Mariya Mummy Ismail of High Court 3 dated 22/4/2024.
Barrister Tahimber also demanded that the magistrate court make available to the accused the CCTV camera footage of the proceedings of 22/4/2024 of High Court 3, names and posting letters containing the duties of the orderly and chief detail assigned to Justice Mariya by the police and the cause list of the High Court 3 on 22/4/2024.
When the Magistrate asked the police prosecutor, Sgt Jacob Lohfe, to respond to the application of the defendant counsel, she answered, “The ones we lay our hands on would be provided before the hearing of the case”.
Consequently, Chief Magistrate Fati Umar Hassan adjourned ruling on the application for subpoena on the judicial officers to July 16, 2024 and alsi adjourned ruling on the bail application for the accused moved by the defence counsel to same date while ordering the remand of the accused in correctional custody.
