A 30-year-old polytechnic student, Al-Amin Mohammed, died by suicide days after being detained and remanded over an N8,000 debt dispute, with fresh accounts raising questions about how the matter was handled by the Oyo State Police Command.
As reported by PUNCH, the dispute reportedly began after Al-Amin obtained N23,000 from a Point-of-Sale operator through his apprentice, Iya Ajike, paying N15,000 and promising to settle the outstanding N8,000 later.
Ajike subsequently took his phone while he was asleep, leading to a confrontation when he returned to retrieve it.
The confrontation allegedly resulted in a scuffle and damage to an Airtel-branded device valued at N177,000, after which Al-Amin was detained by a vigilante, handed over to the police and taken to court before being remanded at the Agodi Custodial Centre.
After his release on bail, Al-Amin, who combined his studies with aluminium work, ingested a poisonous substance and died. His family said the financial strain surrounding his detention and efforts to secure his release had compounded their difficulties.
A retired Deputy Superintendent of Police, Isiaka Ayole, who secured Al-Amin’s release, said the deceased told him that he felt he had been punished because of his inability to pay money.
Ayole questioned why the matter could not have been resolved through mediation after the family offered to guarantee repayment.
Al-Amin’s father, Habeeb Mohammed, alleged that the family was asked to provide N100,000 for his son’s bail before the case was taken to court.
He said the family struggled to meet the subsequent bail conditions, with relatives and well-wishers helping them raise money.
The police, however, disputed the suggestion that the student was prosecuted over the N8,000 debt, saying he was charged with offences relating to alleged assault and damage to an Airtel SIM registration machine.
But a review of the charge sheet reportedly showed that the N8,000 dispute featured in the particulars of the case.
Legal practitioners and a civil society advocate subsequently called for an independent review of the circumstances surrounding the case, stressing that debt recovery should be handled through lawful channels and that police powers should not be used to enforce private debts.
