Forgery: Bauchi Legislator Fights to stop court

A member of Bauchi State House of Assembly, Alhaji Yakubu Ahmed, standing trial for certificate forgery, has challenged the jurisdiction of a Bauchi Chief Magistrates’ Court to entertain the case.

Ahmed, representing Bauchi Central constituency, was dragged to the court by Alhaji Ibrahim Mai-Angale of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), for allegedly forging his primary school certificate.

Mai-Angale had won the April 2011 State Assembly elections but his victory was upturned by an Election Tribunal, which ruled that Ahmed won the election. Consequently, Mai-Angale, on Feb. 20, filed a direct criminal complaint of certificate forgery against Ahmed, alleging that the PDP candidate tendered a forged primary school certificate in his particulars submitted to INEC before the election.

Counsel to the defendant, Mr Mukhtar Usman, who filed a preliminary objection on Tuesday, said that the court lacked juridiction to entertain the case.

Usman argued that magistrate courts were empowered by Sections 15 to 18 of the Criminal Procedure Code to try offences which punishment did not exceed five years imprisonment.
He stated that the punishment for the offence under Section 368 of the law which his client was being charged, attracted 14 years imprisonment, and therefore urged the court to dismiss the case.

On his part, Mr Babatunde Oyefeso, counsel to Mai-Angale, argued that Section 368 of the Penal Code had empowered the court to entertain the case. The section reads:“who ever has in his possession, any forged document knowing same to be forged and intending that the same shall fraudulently or dishonestly be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term, which may be extend to 14 years and shall also be liable to fine.”

He added that the Criminal Procedure Code also vested jurisdiction on the magistrate court to try the offence and prayed the court to dismiss the objection.

The Chief Magistrate, Mr Garba Sambo, after listening to arguments by the two parties, adjourned the case till March 24, for ruling on the preliminary objection.