HAPPENING NOW: Court Orders Arrest Of Tanimu Turaki For Giving False Information To Police

*Fixes April 22 For Arraignment

By Abraham Olatunbosun in Abuja—

A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) sitting in Maitama has issued a bench warrant for the arrest of the self-appointed factional National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Senator Kabiru Tanimu Turaki (SAN).

Justice Peter Kekemeke issued the arrest warrant on Thursday after Turaki failed to attend court for his arraignment on a one-count criminal charge brought against him by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), in which he is accused of, among others, giving false information to the police.

When the case was called on Thursday, the lawyer for the prosecution, Usman Rabiu, said the business of the court for the day was for Turaki to enter his plea to the charge.

The count in the charge, marked: CR/647/2026, reads:

“That you Kabiru Tanimu Turaki, (SAN), male, No: 37 T. Y.  Danjuma Street, Asokoro, Abuja on or about 5th October, 2022 at Abuja within the jurisdiction of this honourable court you gave false information to the Inspector-General of Police via petition dated 5th October, 2022 and signed by you on your letter head paper against one Saidi Mohammed Mainasara with intent to use the lawful power of Inspector-General of Police to the injury or annoyance of the said Muhammed Mainasara and you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 140 of the Penal Code Law.”

Turaki’s lawyer, Rabiu, noted that the defendant was absent in court despite being served with the charge and also served with a hearing notice by the court, informing him about the day’s proceedings.

The lawyer to the prosecution then invoked the provision of Section 396(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, to urge the court to issue an arrest warrant for the defendant to be produced before the court for his arraignment.

Rabiu faulted the reference by the defence lawyer, Abdulaziz Ibrahim (SAN), to a motion he filed for the defendant, seeking that the charge be quashed.

He argued that the defence could only challenge the validity of the charge after the plea of the defendant had been taken.

Ibrahim argued otherwise and urged the court to give him five more days to file written addresses to convince the court that the defendant’s presence was not required until the motion was determined.

Ruling, Justice Kekemeke held that despite being aware of the day’s proceedings having been served with a hearing notice and the charge, it was wrong for Turaki to fail to attend court without providing any reason.

The judge noted that the defence lawyer did not deny that his client was served with a hearing notice of Thursday’s proceedings, but failed to provide any reason why the defendant was not in court.

Justice Kekemeke held that by the provision of  Section 396(2) ACJA 2015, where a defendant, who is aware that a charge is pending against him in court but chooses to stay away, the proper order to be made is for a bench warrant to ensure the production of the defendant to answer to the charge.

The judge held that the motion filed by the defendant seeking the quashing of the charge was not ripe for hearing, adding that such a motion could only be heard after the defendant’s plea had been taken.

He proceeded to issue a bench warrant for Turaki’s arrest to compel the defendant to attend court to answer to the pending charge and adjourned till April 22 for his arraignment.