Court dismisses TSTV CEO’s Suit Against Police Probing Alleged N20Bn Fraud
By Vivian Michael, Abuja
Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed the request of the Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Telcom Satellite Television Service (TSTV), Dr Bright Echefu, seeking to stop the Inspector General of Police (IGP) from investigating him in an alleged N2billion fraud.
The court in its judgement held that the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/234/2024, filed against probing of the alleged N2billion fraud is frivolous and lacking in merit.
The petitioner, a former Minister of Special Duties, Kabiru Tanimu Turaki, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) was before the court alleging that his N2billion investment fund into the TSTV had been fraudulently tampered with.
Justice Ekwo held that it was wrong of the TSTV CEO to seek court protection to shield himself from being probed over a petition against him on alleged stealing and misappropriation of the sum of N2billion investment fund into TSTV.
Defendants in the suit are the DIG Force Investigation Bureau, Kabiru Tanimu Turaki SAN and Attorney General of the Federation as 1st to 5th defendants respectively.
However, upon his summon by Police for explanation into the allegations against him, Echefu had rushed to the federal high court praying for an order to prohibit the Inspector General of Police and his agents from looking into the allegations.
He also sought an order against the Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG) in charge of Force Bureau of Criminal Investigation from investigation into the finances of TSTV under his watch.
The grouse of Echefu was that Kabiru Turaki’s N2billion investment fund was a civil transaction and that police have no power under any known laws to investigate such transactions. Specifically, the TSTV CEO kicked against police invitation to him on the ground that police cannot act as debt recovery agent for the former minister.
However after reviewing his claims and counter claims by Police, Justice Ekwo said that the allegations against Echefu was on stealing and misappropriating N2billion investment fund and not debt recovery drive as he erroneously held against police.
The Judge said that section 4 of Police Act 2020 was so clear as to the statutory powers to investigate such alleged fraud adding that prohibiting police from doing so, as requested by the TSTV CEO, would amount to a judicial victory for the undeserved.
Justice Ekwo held that the TSTV CEO failed woefully to establish his claims of civil matter involving N2billion loan transaction whereas the petition before police was on alleged stealing and misappropriating the huge sums invested into the Company for its expansion.
The Judge disagreed with Echefu that police have no power to investigate such petition against him adding that when a petition has colour of stealing and misappropriating, police are empowered under section 4 of Police Act to inquire into such allegations.
“The plaintiff (Echefu) has not denied being given the several sums of money by the 4th defendant (Kabiru Turaki) as investment in the companies mentioned in the averments in this case.
“The case made against the plaintiff (Echefu) is that of stealing and misappropriation. For the plaintiff to assert and actually sustain the assertion that this matter is contractual and that police cannot be involved, the onus is on the plaintiff to demonstrate with concrete evidence that there was no stealing and misappropriation.
“This is so because the mere claim that a relationship between the parties was and is contractual in nature is not a magic wand that will indiscriminately shield a person from being investigated on the allegations of criminal act arising from civil transaction”.
“To allow a plaintiff to coast home with the treasures of his loot on the grounds that such was contractual matter, will enhance a judicial victory for the undeserved.
“A citizen who is a victim of any act of crime, has right to make a report of same to the police and in the Nigerian system of administration of justice, when a crime is committed, it is the Nigerian police that moves in to investigate it.
“On the whole, the plaintiff has not given me any cogent ground to interfere in the exercise of the statutory power of the 1st and 2nd defendants (Police) on the petition by the 4th defendant (Turaki) that his investment has been stolen and misappropriated by the plaintiff.
“On this ground, I find that this action lacks merit and ought to be dismissed. I therefore make an order dismissing this case on those grounds.
