By paragraphs 9 and 11 of the Counter affidavit, the Respondents though denied the detention of the applicant from 9th – 20th March, 2020, did not disputed the fact that the applicant was in their detention from 9th – 16th March, 2020. By paragraph 4 (i) of the applicant’s supporting affidavit, it was averred that all efforts to get the administrative bail of the applicant proved abortive, and so applied formally through the use of Exhibit “A” annexed to the applicant’s supporting affidavit which is the formal administrative bail application which application according to the applicant’s Counsel, met with stringent conditions calculated to frustrate the grant of the application. These facts as alleged by the applicant are substantially corroborated by the averments contained in paragraphs 10 – 11 of the Respondents Counter affidavit wherein it is stated that though the applicant was granted bail on the 10th of March, 2020, he was unable to fulfill the conditions until on the 16th of March, 2020 when the applied for review of the bail conditions through Exhibit EFCC3 series annexed to the counter affidavit of the Respondents. Furthermore, in paragraphs of the applicant’s supporting affidavit, the applicant alleged that he has suffered a great loss in his business during his stay under the custody of the Respondents. This claim of the applicant was however disputed by the Respondents in paragraph 16 of their Counter affidavit averring that no loss in applicant’s business was occasioned during the applicant’s stay in detention with the Respondents 9