A Kano State High Court on Wednesday fixed Nov. 20 for hearing in pending applications in the ongoing case of alleged bribery and misappropriation against the national chairman of the All Progressive Congress (APC), Dr Abdullahi Ganduje, and seven others.
The state government instituted an eight-count charge bordering on bribery allegations, misappropriation, and division of public funds running into billions of Niara against Ganduje, alongside his wife, Hafsat Umar.
Others are Abubakar Bawuro, Umar Abdullahi Umar, Jibrilla Muhammad, Lamash Properties Limited, Safari Textiles Limited, and Lasage General Enterprises Limited.
When the case came up for hearing of the 6th defendant preliminary objection, counsel to the state, Mr Adeola Adedipe, SAN, told the court that he was not ready to proceed.
“My lord, we have filed our counter affidavit, and one of our witnesses is hearing before the court all the way from Lagos State.”
Counsel to Ganduje, how wife and Umar, Mr Offiong Offiong, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, told the court that he has not served the preliminary objection and the plaintiff’s counter affidavit.
”My lord, we are not ready. We are asking for another date to move the application.”
Counsel to the 3rd and 7th defendant, Mr Taye Falola, informed the court that he was yet to be served the applications and counter affidavit.
“We filed our preliminary objection on motion on notice dated and filed Oct. 10, 2024. We humbly apply for another date for hearing.”
Counsel to the 6th respondent, Mr Nureini Jimoh, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, told the court that he filed a notice of preliminary objection dated July 9.
”We are ready to proceed and move the application.”
Counsel to the 5th and 8th defendants, Abdul Adamu, Senior Advocate of Nigeria and Mr Faruk Asekome, said they have not been served with the preliminary objection as well as counter affidavit.
“We equally filed our notice of preliminary objection dated Oct.17 and filed Oct.18.
“My lord, we are also asking for another date.”
Justice Amina Adamu-Aliyu said service of processes is very important and overruled the plaintiff’s application.
The judge subsequently adjourned the matter until Nov. 20 for hearing of all pending applications.
The court had on July 11, insisted that the trial of the defendants must continue even in their absence.
NAN