On February 9, 2012, four Nigerian man were arrested in Tamil Nadu, India. They were accused of cheating an Indian after informing him that he had won an online lottery. Meanwhile, the men, identified as Oladapo Obasoto, Abiodun Oyekunle, Paul Osagie and Dickson Dickson, are insisting they are legitimate businessmen who were wrongly accused of a crime they knew nothing about.
Saturday Sun learnt that they were arrested, charged to court and granted bail, but were remanded because they were unable to meet their bail conditions. Desperate, they contacted their lawyer who filed a petition requesting for realistic conditions.
This was granted and while they were on their way out of the court premises, they where re- arrested and moved to the Special Refugee Camp for Sri Lanka nationals. They are still in the camp.
It was also gathered that attempts by the Nigerian ambassador to secure their release have failed.
Frustrated also by failed attempts to secure their release by Nigerians based in India, the men, through a letter, raised the alarm, calling on the Nigerian government and the Civil Liberties Organization to come to their rescue.
According to Abiodun Oyekunle, who wrote on behalf of others, they were falsely accused of a crime they did not commit. “We were arrested in February, 2012 by the police. They claim that we deceived someone into believing that he won an online lottery. We were ordered to submit our international passports along with two local sureties as bail conditions after spending almost five months in prison, awaiting trial.”
He claimed that as soon as they stepped out of prison, on April 24, 2012, police re-arrested and took them to the Special Refugee Camp for Sri Lanka and detained them with 32 E order of foreigners act 1946 governed by the Central government of India, which is not meant for any commonwealth nation.
“We challenged the order, with the assistance of Nigerian Embassy and the Madras High Commission directed the government to release us from the camp. This order was given in April 2012, and till date, nothing has been done, despite the fact that Nigerian Embassy signed an undertaking on our behalf.
“No one has bothered to take us to court, ever since we were brought to the camp, in April 2012. Why has Tamil Nadu government been denying us the freedom the court gave us? We have submitted our documents and are ready to go through the normal process to prove that we are innocent.
The men say they have been subjected to all forms of humiliation and inhuman treatments since they were arrested. “We have been subjected to all kinds of physical and mental torture all because we are Nigerians. The camp is full of all kinds of dangerous reptiles while we have access to little or no form of medical attention. We have been deprived access to our family and above all, they disregarded the ambassador who travelled all the way from New Delhi to Tamil Nadu.”
They claim that some Indians were also arrested in connection with the same offence, but were granted bail immediately. According to them, “once any crime is committed and a Nigerian is spotted, he becomes the suspect without any form of investigation. That’s not fair. They see all Nigerians as criminals.
“Even senior officers do acknowledge the fact that our detention is a violation of our human rights, and advised us to cry out to our government or remain in the camp forever.”
The order for bail According to the court document made available to Saturday Sun, the matter is a case between the three Nigerians and the State by the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Cell, Central Crime Branch, Egmore , Chennai 600 008.
The court, as presided by Mr. Justice Sundresh, requested that they be granted bail. Conditions of the bail include the following: “The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10, 000 with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, and Chennai.
The Petitioner shall surrender the passport before the jurisdictional court. The petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily until further orders.”
Unable to meet their bail conditions, the Nigerian contacted their lawyer who wrote a petition challenging the bail conditions.”
Delivering her order in response to that application, honourable Mr. Justice Nagamuthu of the High court of Judicature at Madras stated:
“There was a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to modify the condition imposed by order dated 16.02.2012 in Cri.M.P.No.506 of 2012 by the learned Magistrate, Tambaram, directing the petitioners herein to execute a bond for a sum of RS.1, 00,000 with two sureties for the like sum, each shall be the officials attached to Nigerian consulate.
“The petitioner was accused in Crime No.216 of 2012 on the file of the respondent police. The offences said to have been committed by them are punishable under sections 420 and 468 of IPC and 66-B of the Information Technology Act, 2008. They were arrested by the police and later remanded in judicial custody by the learned Magistrate, Tambaram. Since the investigation was not completed within the statutory period as provided in Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C, the learned Magistrate on an application made by the petitioner in Cri.M.P.No.506 of 2012, granted bail to them on certain conditions.
“One among the conditions is that two sureties should be produced and both should be officials from the Nigerian High Commission.
Obviously, the petitioner could not get the help of officials from the Nigerian Consulate to be sureties for them. As a result the petitioners are languishing in jail. In these circumstances, the petitioners have come up with this original petition seeking to modify the above conditions regarding sureties.
“According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the said condition is onerous. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with this original petition seeking to modify the same.
“I have heard both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent,” the order stated
It went further to make reference to past case as follows: “ In Hussainara Khatoon and others v. Home Secretary, state of Bihar , Patna, 1979 Cri.L.J 1036(1), the Honourable Supreme court has held that such onerous conditions which are not capable of being executed should not be imposed. In this case, in my considered opinion, directing the petitioner to produce two sureties, who should be from the Nigerian High Commission, cannot be countenanced, as it is onerous.
“Therefore, the said condition is modified with a directive to the petitioner to produce two responsible sureties who need not be officers from Nigerian
High commission. It is further directed that the petitioners shall deposit their travel documents and Nigerian passport before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tamaram.
“In the result, the criminal original petition is allowed and the condition imposed by the learned Judical Magistrate, Tambaram, in respect of production of sureties for the release of petitioners is modified as indicated above.”
When contacted Comrade Ibuchukwu Ezike, Executive Director of CLO, condemned the act, describing it as a breach of their human rights. “We will stop at nothing to enforce the rights of these helpless Nigerians,” he promised.
THE SUN
No comments:
Post a Comment