Justice Muyideen Denies Hammed Akanbi Bail, Orders Remand at Ikoyi Correctional Facility Amid Fresh Concerns Over His Whereabouts

Despite concerns over his alleged Stage 3 kidney disease, the defendant was ordered back into custody, raising fresh questions about his medical welfare and whereabouts.

The Lagos State High Court presided over by Justice A.T. Muyideen has refused the bail application of Hammed Tajudeen Akanbi, the third defendant in a murder case involving two other defendants, and ordered his remand at the Ikoyi Correctional Facility amid renewed concerns over his deteriorating health.

In a further development, sources familiar with the matter have indicated that the Ikoyi Correctional Facility again declined to admit Akanbi on medical grounds, leaving uncertainty over his current whereabouts and the arrangements for his continued medical care.

The development has heightened concerns among his family, supporters, members of the Ajiran community and other sympathisers who have followed the proceedings over the past several months.

From Hospital Bed to Courtroom Controversy

The controversy surrounding Akanbi’s detention dates back to June 25, 2026, following the assignment of the case involving him and two others to Justice Muyideen for prosecution on allegations of conspiracy to murder and murder.

According to accounts surrounding the incident, Akanbi, who was reportedly suffering from Stage 3 kidney disease, was brought from a hospital to court in an ambulance while receiving medical attention. He could not be taken into the courtroom because of the absence of suitable facilities to facilitate his movement into the court.

Despite the circumstances, the court reportedly ordered his remand at the Ikoyi Correctional Facility before his arraignment. The facility subsequently declined to admit him, citing his medical condition.

The incident generated public criticism from members of his family, friends, residents of Ajiran and civil society organisations. Some questioned the circumstances surrounding the remand order, while protests and a petition to the Chief Judge of Lagos State were reportedly initiated, seeking the reassignment of the case on concerns about the handling of the proceedings.

The concerns expressed by the protesters included allegations of possible bias, although such allegations remain distinct from any judicial finding of misconduct.

Bail Application Delayed Until After Court Vacation

The defendants were eventually arraigned before Justice Muyideen on July 3, 2026.

However, the court declined to hear the pending bail application and accompanying affidavit of urgency, citing the impending annual court vacation, and adjourned the matter to November 3, 2026.

Efforts to have the application heard during the vacation reportedly proved unsuccessful, as vacation judges maintained that Justice Muyideen, being the substantive judge handling the case, had indicated that the application should be heard after the vacation.

Following intervention by the Chief Judge of Lagos State, the bail application was eventually heard by Justice Muyideen on September 29, 2026.

The ruling, delivered on October 28, 2026, nevertheless ended in a refusal of bail.

Judge Declines to Consider Substantive Evidence

In refusing the application, Justice Muyideen reportedly acknowledged that the proof of evidence before the court contained material described by the defence as exculpatory in relation to Akanbi. However, the judge declined to examine the substantive issues at that stage while determining the bail application.

The defence has maintained that the police investigation materials contain evidence capable of exonerating Akanbi from the allegations against him.

The prosecution, however, continues to pursue the murder charge, and the question of Akanbi’s criminal responsibility remains for determination in the substantive proceedings.

The court subsequently ordered that Akanbi be remanded at the Ikoyi Correctional Facility, notwithstanding the concerns surrounding his medical condition and the earlier refusal of the facility to admit him.

In a related development, the court also refused an application by the first and second defendants (Shafi Fatai and Yusuf Ismaila) seeking an order directing the Kirikiri Correctional Facility to produce their medical history and records relating to treatment they received while in custody.

The refusal has raised further concerns among the defence and supporters about access to information necessary to monitor the defendant’s health while detained.

Former DPP Announces Promotion as Lagos Solicitor-General Following Ruling

In a notable reaction following the delivery of the ruling, the former Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Mr. Adebayo Haroun, expressed appreciation to the court and announced his recent appointment and promotion as the Permanent Secretary and Solicitor-General of Lagos State.

Mr. Haroun reportedly told the court that he had initially been reluctant to disclose his new appointment and promotion. However, following the delivery of the ruling, he said he was delighted to make the announcement before the court.

His remarks came shortly after Justice Muyideen refused Akanbi’s bail application and ordered his remand at the Ikoyi Correctional Facility.

Defence Counsel Appeals for Calm

Reacting to the ruling, Adedotun Ajulo, Esq., one of the lead counsel representing Akanbi, urged the defendant’s sympathisers and supporters who had gathered within the court premises to remain calm.

Ajulo assured them that the defence team would consult with its client before deciding on the appropriate steps to take in response to the ruling.

His appeal appeared aimed at preventing an emotional reaction to the decision while the legal team considers its options.

Fresh Uncertainty Over Akanbi’s Whereabouts

The case took another troubling turn following reports that the Ikoyi Correctional Facility again declined to admit Akanbi on medical grounds after the latest remand order.

As of the time of this report, information available to those following the matter has not established his precise location or the arrangements made for his custody and medical care.

The development raises urgent questions about where Akanbi is being held, which authority currently has custody of him, and what measures have been put in place to ensure that his medical needs are addressed.

Given the reported nature of his illness, his immediate location, access to appropriate medical attention and the legal basis for any continued detention are matters requiring prompt clarification by the relevant authorities.

For Akanbi’s family and supporters, the immediate concern extends beyond the denial of bail to the uncertainty surrounding his physical condition and whereabouts.

As the murder proceedings continue, the central questions remain: where is Hammed Tajudeen Akanbi currently being held, who is responsible for his custody, and what arrangements have been made to protect his health while he remains in detention?