The State Government’s counsel, Barrister Ya’u Adamu, sought court permission to serve the Respondents through substituted means, but the presiding judge, Justice Usman Naabba, denied the request. Instead, he directed that the defendants be properly served on notice to determine if substituted service is appropriate in a criminal trial.

In the subsequent, arguments, Barrister Adamu Ya’u admitted to not serving all the Defendants except the 6th Defendant, Lamash.

He requested the court to allow substituted service, arguing its relevance in litigation.

On the other hand, Lamash’s counsel, Nuraini Jimoh (SAN) countered that there is no provision for substituted service in criminal trials, citing that personal service is required.

The Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) emphasized the exclusivity of court service, relying on specific legal items.

After hearing arguments for and against substituted service, the judge instructed the prosecution to serve all the Respondents with notice for the court to decide whether substituted service or personal service should be employed.

The court adjourned the proceedings to 29th April 2024.

The Defendants in the case include Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, Hafsat Umar, Abubakar Bawuro, Umar Abdullahi Umar, Jibrilla Muhammad, Lamash, Safari Textiles Ltd, and Lesage General Enterprises.

They are accused of financial misappropriation and corruption during Ganduje’s tenure as Governor of Kano State.

Justice Watch