Judgment adopted the 1st issue as formulated by the Applicant with same paraphrasing, that is:“Whether the Applicant is entitled to the reliefs sought in the circumstances of this application.” The application of the Applicant is brought pursuant to Articles 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Order 2 Rules 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009, Section 46 (1) and (2) of the CFRN 1999 as amended and under the inherent jurisdiction of this court. By paragraphs 1-6 of the grounds upon which this application is brought and the averments contained in paragraphs 6 (cc), (ff), (hh), (ii) of the Applicant’s supporting affidavit, and paragraphs 3-19 of the Applicant’s further affidavit, the Applicant alleged that the Respondents on 27/10/2020 arrested him in lieu of another suspect and subsequently detained him without any justification and in violation of his constitutional right to personal liberty guaranteed under Section 35 of the CFRN 1999 as amended, and upon which acts of the Respondents, the Applicant approached this court seeking for the reliefs sought in this Judgment. Arguing the application, counsel to the Applicant submitted by the action of the Respondents, the Applicant by the provisions of Sections 35 and 46 (1) of the CFRN 1999 as amended and the provision of Order 2 Rule 1 of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) rules 2009, the Applicant’s right to personal liberty having being infringed by the Respondents, is entitled to the reliefs sought. Page 5 of 12