By Uche Bibilari
An Upper Area Court in Gwagwalada, FCT, on Wednesday referred an alleged adultery case preferred against a businesswoman, Hauwa Haruna to the police for proper investigation.
Haruna, who resides within the jurisdiction of the court was charged with adultery by a woman.
The Judge, Sani Umar in his ruling referred the case to Gwagwalada Area Command for proper investigation and the findings reported back to the court, after an oral application by the claimant Counsel, Albert Ade’jembi that the matter be referred for investigation.
Umar adjourned the case until Nov. 8 for report of findings.
Ade’jembi told the court that the complainant, Danjuma Chiya is a civil servant who resides within the jurisdiction of the court.
He said that the complainant was in a relationship with the defendant since 2010 when she was much younger than her present state.
He said that the relationship between the two parties cumulated into marriage proposal, adding that in 2020 the complainant paid the bride price of the defendant in her family compound before her parent.
He said that the parties have been legally married since 2020 but lived separately as the defendant keep giving excuses why she would not move in with the complainant.
The claimant counsel said that the complainant accepted the excuses of the defendant because of the love he has for her.
He said that the defendant asked the complainant to build a house for her in his compound before she would move in which he did, adding that the building was at the finishing stage.
Ade’jembi said that the complainant was surprised to see the wife pregnant, adding that on further enquiry he found out that one James Gwara was responsible.
He said that the complainant confronted Gwara and he accepted that he was responsible for the pregnancy and boasted that he was in love with the defendant for almost two years now.
He said that the complainant asked Gwara if he was aware that the defendant was lawfully married to him and he answered in the affirmative that he was aware.
The complainant, he said, felt betrayed and deceived by the defendant’s action.
He said that the complainant was seeking for the conviction and sentence of the defendant for the above mentioned offence.
He said that the offence contravened the provision of Section 388 of the Penal Code. (NAN)
