Court clarifies Dallah’s bail rejection request…says application based on hearsay

From Zwanke Abel, Lafia 

The Federal High Court in Lafia has clarified the  rejection of the bail application filed by Ibrahim Kabiru Dallah, ruling that it was based on hearsay evidence and failed to comply with the provisions of the Evidence Act.

In a court ruling obtained by our correspondent on Monday noted that Justice M. O. Olajuwon had delivered the ruling on December 12, 2025, in a case where Dallah is charged by the Commissioner of Police for alleged cybercrime offences, including cyberbullying, under the Cybercrimes Act.

The prosecution maintained that cybercrime is a criminal offence under Nigerian law and urged the court to refuse bail, citing the defendant’s alleged online conduct and the likelihood of repeating similar offences if released.

According to the court, the affidavit supporting the bail application was deposed to by a litigation secretary in the defence law firm, rather than by the defendant or his counsel on record, Baba Ayiwulu Baba.

The litigation secretary claimed to have received information from a counsel who was allegedly briefed by an unnamed person, a situation the court described as legally unacceptable.

“The litigation secretary got his information from a counsel who got his information from an unknown person,” Justice Olajuwon ruled.

“Not only is the information hearsay, it lacks probative value.”

The judge cited Sections 115(1) and (4) of the Evidence Act, stressing that affidavits must contain facts within the personal knowledge of the deponent or clearly disclose the source of such information.

“Hearsay evidence is inadmissible under our laws,” the court held, relying on established judicial authorities.

Justice Olajuwon struck out paragraph four of the affidavit, described by the defence as the backbone of the bail application.

“With paragraph four struck out, there are no adequate facts upon which this court can exercise its discretion in favour of the Defendant/Applicant,” the judge concluded.

Although the bail application was refused, the court struck it out rather than dismissing it, allowing the defendant the opportunity to return with a properly constituted application.