The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday discharged and acquitted suspended Deputy Commissioner of Police Abba Kyari and his two younger brothers after dismissing a case filed by the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) over alleged non-disclosure of assets.

Delivering judgment, Justice James Omotosho held that the anti-narcotics agency failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt, describing the case against Kyari and his brothers as “persecution.”

The judge ruled that the burden of proof in a criminal case lies with the prosecution, noting that the NDLEA did not sufficiently establish the charges brought before the court. He consequently dismissed the suit and acquitted the defendants.

Kyari, a former head of the Police Intelligence Response Team (IRT), was prosecuted alongside his brothers, Mohammed Kyari and Ali Kyari, in a 23-count charge bordering on alleged failure to declare assets and related financial offences.

The NDLEA had alleged that the defendants failed to fully disclose properties and financial assets. According to the agency, investigations uncovered about 14 assets allegedly linked to Kyari, including shopping malls, residential estates, farmland, lands and a polo playground located in parts of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, and Maiduguri in Borno State.

The anti-narcotics agency also claimed that more than ₦207 million and €17,598 were discovered in various bank accounts linked to Kyari in financial institutions including Guaranty Trust Bank, United Bank for Africa and Sterling Bank.

In the charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/408/2022, the NDLEA further accused the defendants of disguising ownership of properties and converting funds in violation of provisions of the NDLEA Act and the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011.

However, Kyari and his brothers pleaded not guilty to all the counts during the trial.

At the hearing prior to judgment, counsel for the NDLEA, Sunday Joseph, Kyari’s lawyer, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), and counsel to the two brothers, Monjok Agom, adopted their final written addresses and presented arguments for and against the charges.

The court ultimately ruled that the prosecution had not established its case to the standard required by law and therefore dismissed the suit.