State vs Sheriff: Court acquits Nyako’s Ex-CSO of all charges in a five-year legal battle
By Mohammed Ismail
The five-year criminal prosecution instituted by the Adamawa State Government against retired Assistant Commissioner of Police and former Chief Security Officer to ex-Governor Murtala Nyako, Sheriff Abubakar Rabiu, came to a dramatic end on Friday as the Chief Judge of Adamawa State, Justice Hapsat Abdurrahman, acquitted and discharged the defendant on all five criminal counts.
The judgment, delivered at High Court I in Yola, effectively brought to a close one of Adamawa’s most closely watched legal disputes, a case that originated from allegations by former Governor Murtala Nyako that his former security chief fraudulently defrauded him of N80m in the name of acquiring two landed properties in Yola.
Related news
State vs Sheriff: Sebore Farms Ltd, Sebore Export Process Zone not registered – CAC official
State vs Sheriff: Court adjourns sitting to Oct. 18 over non appearance of witnesses
We didn’t celebrate Buhari’s death, Adamawa shi’te faction leader says
The prosecution had allelged that Sheriff committed criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery, fraud, documents, dishonesty and conduct capable of inciting public disturbance in relation to transactions involving Sebore Farms Limited and Sebore Export Process Zone.
The matter, which commenced following Sheriff’s arraignment on November 12, 2021, saw the state presenting five prosecution witnesses in an effort to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt.
However, after reviewing both the oral testimonies and documentary exhibits, the Chief Judge held that the prosecution failed to establish the essential ingredients of every offence contained in the charge.
In a judgment which the CJ said was anchored on established principles of Justice, Abdurrahman reiterated that every person accused of a criminal offence enjoys the constitutional presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
The court emphasized that the burden of proof rests entirely on the prosecution and never shifts to the accused person.
Quoting settled principles of criminal law, the court held that every ingredient of each criminal offence must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and that failure to establish even one essential element is sufficient to defeat the entire charge.
Justice Abdurrahman observed that criminal liability cannot be founded on assumptions, suspicion or speculation but must be supported by cogent, credible and legally admissible evidence.
Delivering detailed findings on the first count of criminal breach of trust, the Chief Judge held that the prosecution failed to establish the very foundation of the alleged breach of trust.
According to her, although allegations were made that Sheriff converted property entrusted to him, the prosecution never clearly explained the nature of that trust, how it arose, or the legal obligation allegedly breached.
Justice Abdurrahman ruled that the absence of evidence defining the trust relationship was fatal to the charge.
”The nature of the trust is a material ingredient of the offence. Where that essential ingredient is absent, the offence cannot be said to have been proved,” the court held.l
On the allegation of cheating, the court equally found the prosecution’s evidence grossly deficient.
Justice Abdurrahman noted that none of the prosecution witnesses established that Sheriff fraudulently induced Sebore Farms Limited or any individual to part with N80 million through deception.
The court observed that testimonies from the prosecution witnesses failed to demonstrate any dishonest representation capable of constituting the offence of cheating.
She noted that evidence presented before the court showed that issues surrounding the disputed properties were linked to company transactions, renovation agreements and disagreements over outstanding financial obligations rather than deliberate criminal deception.
The judge further noted that the prosecution failed to call several material witnesses whose evidence would have been crucial in proving the allegations.
The absence of these vital witnesses, the court held, created significant gaps in the prosecution’s case.
Justice Abdurrahman also dismissed the allegations bordering on forgery and fraudulent execution of documents.
Although the prosecution questioned documents relating to Ashraf Nigeria Limited, the court held that no credible evidence established that Sheriff forged any signatures or fraudulently manufactured official seals.
The Chief Judge observed that allegations that certain company documents were backdated, even if accepted did not automatically translate into criminal liability in the absence of proof that the defendant personally fabricated or dishonestly executed them.
The prosecution, the court held, failed to connect the defendant with any act capable of satisfying the legal ingredients of forgery.
Justice Abdurrahman held that no evidence whatsoever was presented linking Sheriff to any conduct capable of disturbing public peace or provoking disorder.
Having found that all five counts failed for lack of proof beyond reasonable doubt, Justice Abdurrahman discharged and acquitted Sheriff Abubakar Rabiu on every charge.
