A Kaduna businessman, Nasir Musa Idris, has filed multiple criminal complaints against Islamic scholar Dr. Ahmad Abubakar Gumi and six others, alleging wrongful detention of his Moroccan wife, theft of $20,000 and 6,000 Saudi Riyals, defamation, and forgery of court documents.
The complaints have been instituted before the Chief Magistrate Court in Barnawa, the Chief Magistrate Court in Kabala Doki, and the Sharia Court of Kaduna State, according to court documents seen by SaharaReporters.
At the Chief Magistrate Court, Kaduna Magisterial Division at Barnawa, an application dated April 28, 2026 names four defendants: Dr. Ahmad Abubakar Gumi, Amal Ahmad Gumi, Mahmud Ahmad Gumi and Mubarak Ahmad Gumi, citing alleged offences of “criminal conspiracy, criminal trespass, theft, enticement of a married women, defamation of character, injurious falsehood, and false statement in declaration” under the Kaduna State Penal Code Law 2017.
At the Sharia Court, Kaduna Judicial Division, a separate application, with case No. 026/2026, dated May 7, 2026 names six defendants, adding Umar Shahada (Sambo) and Abubakar Abdullahi Goron Namaye as the 5th and 6th defendants. They were described elsewhere as “associates and close collaborators of the 1st Defendant (Dr. Ahmad Abubakar Gumi).”
The 1st Defendant, Dr. Ahmad Abubakar Gumi, was described in court documents as “a person of influence who holds himself out as a religious leader”.
The 2nd Defendant, Amal Ahmad Gumi, also referred to as Amal Elouakili, was described as his wife. The 3rd and 4th defendants, Mahmud Ahmad Gumi and Mubarak Ahmad Gumi, were described as Dr. Gumi’s sons, while the 5th and 6th defendants, Umar Shahada (Sambo) and Abubakar Abdullahi Goron Namaye, were described as “associates and close collaborators of the 1st Defendant” who “acted in concert with the other Defendant in the matter mentioned.”
This filing cites alleged offences under the Sharia Penal Code including “criminal conspiracy, wrongful restraint and wrongful confinement, criminal trespass, procuration of a woman.”
At the Chief Magistrate Court, Kabala Doki, a third application, with case No. KMD/DC/2026, against the same six defendants alleges “criminal conspiracy, giving false information and making use of a false document with intent that it be believed to be genuine”, under Sections 59 and 345 of the Kaduna State Penal Code Law.
This filing also asks the court to issue a warrant of arrest “in the first instance,” arguing that “service of summons is likely to be impracticable and may be evaded, thereby frustrating the course of justice.”
The Complainant states that in October 2024, he “lawfully contracted a valid Islamic marriage with one Khadija Diab, a Moroccan national, after fulfilling all requisite legal and immigration formalities.”
He further states that he “duly processed all necessary documentation and brought his wife to Nigeria where they resided together as husband and wife at No. 2A/2B Block of Flats, Alkali Close, Kaduna.”
According to the filings, prior to the events giving rise to the complaint, neither the Complainant nor his wife had any form of relationship with Dr. Gumi, “save for a single introduction made by the Complainant at Dialogue Pharmacy, Isa Kaita Road, Kaduna, merely because the 1st Defendant’s wife is also a Moroccan.”
The document emphasises: “Beyond this introduction, there exists no familial, marital, or legal relationship whatsoever between the Complainant’s wife and the 1st Defendant.”
The Complainant alleges that on or about September 16, 2025, he “received a telephone call through the 3rd Defendant to the effect that the 1st Defendant alleged that the Complainant’s wife had made complaints against him and requested that she be brought to his residence for counselling.”
Relying on what the court documents describe as “the perceived religious standing of the 1st Defendant (Dr. Gumi) and acting in good faith,” the Complainant took his wife to the Defendants’ residence, “where he was persuaded to leave her in their custody.”
The filing states that from that moment, “the Defendants, acting in concert, wrongfully restrained and exerted undue influence over the Complainant’s wife, preventing her from returning to her matrimonial home and denying the Complainant access to her.”
Alleged Unlawful Conditions and Demands
The Complainant alleges that his efforts to retrieve his wife were met with resistance. The documents state that “the 1st and 2nd Defendants imposed unlawful and extraneous conditions, including demands for the provision of a motor vehicle, financial benefits, and permission for the wife to engage in employment against the wishes of the Complainant.”
The filing further states: “The Defendants continued to harbour and detain the Complainant’s wife without lawful justification, thereby interfering with his lawful marital rights.”
In the Sharia Court filing, the Complainant states: “From that moment, the Complainant left his wife in the custody and influence of the Defendants, the Defendants collectively began to interfere with the marital relationship between the Complainant and his wife. Thereafter, the Defendants prevented and frustrated efforts made by the Complainant to have access to his wife and to return her to the matrimonial home.”
The documents also allege that “the Defendants further harboured and maintained the Complainant’s wife in their residence and engaged her in activities without the consent of the Complainant.”
Allegations of Theft and Criminal Trespass
On or about September 19, 2025, the Complainant alleges that “the 2nd Defendant, acting on the instructions of the 1st Defendant and accompanied by unidentified persons, unlawfully entered the Complainant’s residence without consent and removed the complainant’s personal belongings, including a travelling bag containing the sum of $20,000 and 6,000 Saudi Riyals, alongside other valuables.”
The documents state: “The said acts were carried out without any lawful justification.”
Defamation Allegations
The Complainant also alleges defamation against Dr. Gumi. According to the court documents, “the 1st Defendant has made and caused to be circulated false and malicious statements against him, alleging immoral and unnatural conduct, with intent to damage his reputation.”
The filing states: “These statements are entirely false and have exposed the Complainant to public ridicule, reputational harm, and restriction in his freedom of movement.”
Alleged Forgery and False Information Before Sharia Court
A significant portion of the complaints relates to proceedings before the Sharia Court in Malali, Kaduna. The Complainant alleges that “the 1st Defendant represented himself as the lawful guardian (Wali) of the Complainant’s wife before the Sharia Court, Malali Kaduna where the 1st Defendant allegedly supplied information to the said Court which the Complainant contends was false and misleading.”
According to the filings, based on these alleged misrepresentations, “a purported marriage-related certificate/document was issued by the Sharia Court, Malali Kaduna wherein the 1st Defendant endorsed and signed the said document in a capacity which the Complainant contends he did not lawfully occupy.”
The Complainant states that upon discovering the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the document, he “instituted proceedings before the Sharia Court, Malali Kaduna challenging its validity” and that “following proceedings before the said Court, the purported certificate/document was set aside and the said Court further ordered that the certificate should not be relied upon or used before any Court.”
Despite this court order, the Complainant alleges: “Notwithstanding the subsisting order of the said Court, the 1st Defendant continued to relied upon and present the said marriage certificate in other proceedings.”
The Complainant states that “despite efforts at reconciliation, including the delivery of personal items to his wife on or about the 3rd day of November 2025, the Defendants rejected such efforts and continued to pressure the Complainant to dissolve his marriage against his will.”
“The Complainant in furtherance of reconciliation, made effort to deliver personal items for his wife to the residence of the 1st – 4th Defendants,” the filing says.
“That acting on the instruction of the 1st Defendant, the said items were rejected and returned to the Complainant whereof the Defendants frustrated and undermine the Complainant’s genuine effort at reconciliation.”
Criminal Offences Alleged
The Complainant alleges that the Defendants’ actions constitute offences of criminal conspiracy, criminal trespass, theft, enticement of a married woman, defamation of character, injurious falsehood, and false statement in declaration.
The Sharia Court filing states: “The acts of the Defendants as enumerated hereof constituted the offences of criminal conspiracy, wrongful restraint and wrongful confinement, criminal trespass, procuration of a woman contrary to sections 117, 235, 236, 174, 226, and punishable under sections 118, 237, 238 and section 180 of the Shari’a Penal Code of Kaduna State Law.”
In the Chief Magistrate Court filing, the Complainant states: “The acts of the Defendants as enumerated hereof constitute offences of criminal conspiracy, Criminal trespass, theft, enticement of a married women, defamation of character, injurious falsehood, and false statement in declaration punishable under Sections 59, 334, 271, 369, 372, 373 and 127 of the Kaduna State penal code law, 2017.”
The Complainant also alleges that the Defendants’ actions constituted “the offences of criminal conspiracy, giving false information and making use of a false document with intent that it be believed to be genuine, and thereby amount to the offence of Criminal Conspiracy, forgery, contrary to and punishable under Section 59 and 345 of the Kaduna State Penal Code Law, 2017.”
Request for Warrant of Arrest
The Complainant’s counsel has indicated in the filings: “In view of the circumstances of this case and the conduct of the Defendants, the issuance of a Warrant of Arrest in the first instance, will be urged on the ground that service of summons is likely to be impracticable and may be evaded, thereby frustrating the course of justice.”
The court documents indicate that all defendants reside within the jurisdiction of the courts, with the 1st through 4th Defendants all residing at No. 14b Dendo Road, Kaduna.
M.B. Alhassan Esq. and M.S. Aliyu, Esq., of M.B. Alhassan & Co., No. 1A Ahmadu Bello Way, Kaduna, are acting as counsel to the Complainant.
