The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Abuja has adjourned the criminal trial of lawyer Victor Giwa and a co-defendant, instituted by the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), following the failure of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Awa U. Kalu, to appear before the court as a subpoenaed prosecution witness.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-IDRI-Masterclass.png")
The court, on Monday, November 9, 2026, fixed November 18 and 19 for continuation of the trial after it was informed that Kalu had filed an application seeking to set aside or vary the subpoena compelling him to testify.
The proceedings, marked Charge No. CR/150/2025, were stalled following the application by Kalu, who was expected to give evidence for the prosecution.
When the matter was called at about 10:25 a.m., prosecution counsel, S.A. Medugu, appearing alongside E.T. Emmanuel, informed the court that he had received a letter from Kalu’s lawyer, Sunny Ajala, SAN, requesting that the matter be stood down or adjourned.
Medugu explained that the letter referred to a motion filed by Kalu and served on the prosecution on November 6, 2026, but said he had not yet examined its contents.
The prosecutor, however, maintained that Kalu had been properly served with the subpoena on October 7 and 12, 2026.
He informed the court that proof of service and acknowledged copies bearing the stamp of the senior lawyer’s chambers were already before it.
Relying on Section 397 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), Medugu argued that a person served with a subpoena was legally obligated to appear before the court unless formally discharged from that obligation.
He further submitted that the prosecution could have sought a warrant of arrest against Kalu under Sections 243, 244 and 246 of the ACJA for failing to honour the subpoena.
However, he explained that the prosecution had decided against taking that step out of respect for the senior lawyer.
Medugu consequently urged the court to direct Kalu to appear on the next adjourned date to enable the prosecution to proceed with its case.
Responding, Ajala informed the court that Kalu had briefed him early on Monday morning and that he had encountered difficulties arising from conflicting court engagements.
He argued that although Kalu was not a party to the substantive criminal proceedings, he remained entitled to constitutional protection and fair hearing under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
Ajala explained that his client had filed a motion on notice seeking to set aside or vary the subpoena to minimise the hardship its enforcement could impose on him.
He therefore sought the court’s permission to move the application immediately.
The prosecution opposed the request, maintaining that it needed time to study the motion and prepare an appropriate response before the application could be heard.
Ajala did not object to the prosecution’s request for an adjournment.
The proceedings, however, took another turn when Giwa, who appeared in person, protested what he described as his exclusion from proceedings concerning the subpoenaed witness.
Giwa expressed concern that an application involving a witness expected to testify in the criminal case was being considered without the defence being served or given an opportunity to make representations.
He questioned why the matter was being addressed without his participation, particularly as the witness’s proposed testimony formed part of the prosecution’s case against him and his co-defendant.
Ajala disputed Giwa’s account, insisting that his description of the earlier proceedings was inaccurate.
The senior lawyer recalled that during the previous sitting on October 30, 2026, when the prosecution raised the issue of a request for a stand-down or adjournment concerning the subpoenaed witness, the court invited other parties to respond.
According to Ajala, he specifically sought clarification concerning the position of defence counsel, after which Giwa informed the court that his lawyer was absent and that he was representing himself.
Ajala subsequently urged Giwa to withdraw his remarks, rephrase his complaint or apologise to the court.
The exchange became heated when prosecution counsel Medugu accused Giwa of repeatedly making allegations against the court.
Following the observations made by the senior lawyer, the court asked Giwa whether he was willing to apologise to the court and the Bar.
Responding, Giwa said: “Yes, my Lord, I apologise to the Court and to the Bar.”
After considering the submissions, the judge adjourned the matter until November 18 and 19, 2026, for continuation of proceedings and consideration of the pending issues arising from Kalu’s application.
The court also vacated the earlier trial dates of November 11 and 16, which had previously been scheduled for the proceedings.
The adjournment leaves the question of Kalu’s obligation to testify unresolved, pending the court’s consideration of his application to set aside or vary the subpoena.
The trial of Giwa and his co-defendant is expected to continue on the new dates, subject to the determination of the pending application.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
“A Comprehensive Guide To Evidence Law” — Releases Second Edition In Three Volumes, Covering 4,051 Cases
For enquiries and orders, contact: 08035526491 Email: jerryamadisilk@gmail.com
Prof. Jerry Amadi’s Evidence Law, Second Edition (2026), contains 3,314 pages in three volumes, covering the Evidence Act 2011, its 2023 amendment, and 4,051 Nigerian and English cases.
