Defendant without any lawful justification, he having been originally released by the order of Municipal Courts. In the same vein, that Nigerian Municipal Courts having held that its order admitting the Applicant to bail was not flouted by the Defendant, their assertion that this action is based on the Defendant’s contempt of the Municipal Court order is incorrect. Accordingly, it is also incorrect as alleged by the Defendant that the remedy available to the Applicant lies in the pursuit of proceedings provided for in Form 48 of the High Court Procedure Rules at the national level. The Applicant cited a plethora of decisions by this Court to the effect that once the allegation before this Court is the violation of human rights, the Court has jurisdiction to entertain same and concluded that the current Application, as can be gleaned from the facts, is for the violation of the human rights of the Applicant and that is sufficient to invoke the Court’s jurisdiction. Before considering the issues for determination raised by this Application, it is pertinent to observe as follows; i. The Defendant’s objection (Document 5) which according to her is brought inter alia, under S.6 (6) of The Constitution of the Defendant and Order 35 of the Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules, as well as S.1 Sections 6 and 133 of the Criminal Procedure 20