A lawsuit contesting the selection of Arch Shehu Tukur as the legitimate APC senatorial candidate for the Nasarawa West Senatorial District has been heard by the Lafia-based Federal High Court, which has deferred judgement.
When the case came up for hearing on Friday, there was drama as the INEC subpoena, who showed up on the court's order, exposed fraud by Arch Shehu Tukur to clinch the party's senatorial ticket against his primary rival, Barr Labaran Magaji.
After hearing arguments from all parties, the presiding judge, Justice Nehizina Idumudia Afolabi, reserved judgement in the lawsuit seeking to overturn the nomination of Arch Shehu Tukur as the APC senatorial candidate for Nasarawa West and declare Barr Labaran Magaji the legitimate winner of the primary elections until a date that will be made known to the parties.
Already, the APC senatorial candidate, Arch Shehu Tukur, who is the anointed candidate of the APC national chairman, Senator Abdullahi Adamu, is in panic mode over the revelation of the INEC subpoena, Mr Omale Samuel in court.
An APC senatorial aspirant, Barr Labaran Magaji had polled 114 votes during the June 4th senatorial primaries and is challenging the emergence of Arch Shehu Tukur who garnered 179 votes to clinch the party’s ticket for Nasarawa West senatorial zone.
Magaji is alleging that the 125 delegates from Keffi and Nasarawa LGAs are fake and not authentic delegates elected for that purpose. He is also claiming that only delegates from Toto, Karu and Kokona LGAs that are made up of the senatorial zone were genuine delegates.
At the resumed hearing yesterday, there was an argument as to whether Omale Samuel, the INEC staff whose signature and stamp were allegedly forged to certify some documents purported to be INEC documents should be taken or not.
The Court in delivering its ruling decided that the witness be taken before going into the substantive matter.
Mr Omale Samuel denied ever seeing the document let alone ever signing the documents attached to the counter affidavit by the 2nd defendant (Arch Tukur)
He also stated that the signature and stamp on the said documents were not his and do not resembles his.