Ibadan stampede: Court sets date to rule on Ooni's ex-queen, Oriyomi's bail application - THE METRO

JOIN OUR NEWS UPDATE GROUP: CLICK HERE

Ibadan stampede: Court sets date to rule on Ooni’s ex-queen, Oriyomi’s bail application

Justice K. B. Olawoyin, presiding over Court 8 of the Oyo State High Court, Ring Road, Ibadan, has fixed Tuesday, January 13, to deliver his ruling on the bail application filed by Ooni of Ife’s ex-queen, Naomi Silekunola, Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat, and Abdulahi Fasasi.

Hamzat is the proprietor of Agidigbo FM, an Ibadan-based radio station; while Fasasi is the Principal of Islamic High School, Bashorun, Ibadan.

They are currently standing trial over the stampede which occurred during a Christmas funfair at Islamic High School, Bashorun, Ibadan, in December 2024.

See also  VIDEO: ‘God made me keep my dreadlocks to save a life,’ Jimmy Odukoya shares encounter with Zimbabwean

The incident claimed the lives of no fewer than 35 children.

The bail applications were heard at the Oyo State High Court, Court 8, Ring Road, Ibadan, on Tuesday.

Counsel for the suspects had filed a summons of application for bail before the court.

After listening to the submissions and arguments of the counsel on points of law, Justice Olawoyin adjourned ruling on the bail application till Tuesday, January 13.

See also  VIDEO: Police Arrest Officer Accused in Viral Video of Stabbing Man in Ekiti

The suspects are currently being remanded at the Nigerian Correctional Centre Agodi

Fasasi was represented by Waheed Olajide, Ex-queen Naomi was represented by Musibau Adetunmbi (SAN) and Hamzat was represented by Adekunle Sobaloju (SAN).

The cases were argued separately by the counsel in a proceeding that lasted over five hours.

The state had also filed a counter-application against the bail of the suspects.

See also  10 key factors to consider before converting vehicles to CNG

The state team was led by the Attorney General and Commissioner of Justice, Mr Abiodun Aikomo who led top officials of the Ministry of Justice.

All the counsel in their separate arguments told the court why their clients should be allowed to enjoy their freedom, noting that there are no sufficient evidence is before the court to warrant the confining to prison custody.

Punch

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *