The bail application filed by the former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello Bello at a Federal Capital Territory High Court on Tuesday failed to sail through following lapses in Procedure
Bello, alongside two co-defendants, is facing charges from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over alleged involvement in a N110 billion money laundering case.
Delivering the ruling, Justice Maryanne Anenih declared the application incompetent, noting it was filed prematurely before Bello was in court or custody. “Having not been filed when the first defendant was either in custody or before the court, this instant application is incompetent.
Consequently, the application, having been filed prematurely, is hereby refused,” she said.
The court indicated that the bail application, dated November 22, was submitted days before Bello’s arraignment on November 27 and his detention on November 26.
Bello’s counsel, Jacob Daudu (SAN), argued for the court’s discretion, emphasizing his client’s past as a two-term governor and his willingness to adhere to bail conditions. “The first defendant became aware of the instant charge through the public summons.
He is a responsible individual and will abide by the conditions set by the court,” Daudu asserted.
In response, EFCC counsel Kemi Pinheiro (SAN) argued that the application contravened provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, rendering it invalid.
“The timing of the filing makes it grossly incompetent. We urge the court to dismiss it,” Pinheiro said.
Meanwhile, the court granted bail to the second defendant, Umar Oricha, setting it at N300 million with two sureties. The conditions required the sureties to own properties in Abuja’s Maitama district valued at no less than the bail sum.
The original title documents of the properties and international passports of the sureties are to be submitted to the court.
Oricha must also deposit his travel documents with the court and remain in custody until all conditions are satisfied.
The case continues to draw public attention, with legal experts debating the procedural implications of the ruling.