Tag: Court

  • Court fixes Akpoti-Uduaghan’ arraignment for June, 30th

    Court fixes Akpoti-Uduaghan’ arraignment for June, 30th

    The widely publicized arraignment of suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan before the Federal High Court, Abuja, for offences under the CyberCrimes could not proceed today due to the absence of personal service of the charge on the Defendant.

    According to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), all previous efforts to effect personal service on the Senator were unsuccessful, as she was reportedly outside the country.

    However, when the matter came up today for the first time, the DPP applied to the court for leave to serve the charge through the Senator’s counsel. The application was granted by the court, and the charge was duly served.

    In view of this development, the DPP requested an adjournment to enable proper arraignment, which the court granted. The new date for arraignment is now fixed for 30th June, 2025 before Honourable Justice M.G. Umar (Court 5).

  • Man jailed 14 years for attempting sexual assault on stepdaughter

    Man jailed 14 years for attempting sexual assault on stepdaughter

    An Ikeja Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Court on Wednesday sentenced a man, Ahmed Ayinla, to 14 years’ imprisonment for attempting to sexually assault his nine-year-old stepdaughter (name withheld).

    Justice Rahman Oshodi convicted Ayinla after he pleaded guilty, under a plea bargain agreement, to an amended one-count charge of attempted sexual assault by penetration.

    While delivering the judgment, Oshodi stated that he was satisfied the convict understood the nature of the plea bargain agreement.

    He said: “I must emphasise the gravity of the circumstances that have brought you before this court.

    “You were initially charged with the more serious offence of defilement, which carries a prescribed punishment of life imprisonment under the criminal law.

    “The evidence before this court revealed a disturbing pattern of sexual abuse perpetrated against your nine-year-old stepdaughter over an extended period.

    “The survivor testified that these incidents were ‘uncountable’ in number while she was under your care and protection, and medical evidence confirmed physical injuries consistent with repeated abuse.

    “This was not an isolated incident, but a sustained campaign of sexual exploitation against a vulnerable child who looked up to you as a father”.

    The judge held that the convict occupied a position of authority and responsibility for the survivor’s welfare, but violated that sacred trust in the most egregious manner possible.

    He said that the survivor had been living under the convict’s roof, dependent on him for her basic needs and vulnerable to his predatory behaviour.

    Oshodi added that the convict had exploited this dependency to satisfy his sexual gratification, causing immeasurable harm to an innocent child.

    “However, through the plea bargain process, you have pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of attempted sexual assault by penetration under Section 262, which carries a maximum sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment.

    “This plea represents an acknowledgment of wrongdoing, and I hereby sentence you to 14 years’ imprisonment, commencing on Sept. 18, 2020, being the date of your remand.

    “Your name shall be registered as a sexual offender,” Oshodi held.

    The convict was initially arraigned on a charge of defilement, during which the state counsel, Ms Bukola Okeowo, presented three witnesses against him.

    The prosecutor, however, informed the court on June 10 that the convict had opted for a plea bargain agreement, which necessitated the amended charge.

  • Alleged N5.2bn scam: Heavy headache for ex-JAMB boss, Ojerinde as Court Quashes no case submission

    Alleged N5.2bn scam: Heavy headache for ex-JAMB boss, Ojerinde as Court Quashes no case submission

    Justice Obiora Egwuatu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has dismissed the no-case submission filed by the former registrar of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB), Dibu Ojerinde.

    Ojerinde was arraigned by the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) in July 2021 and is standing trial on an 18-count charge over an alleged ₦5.2 billion fraud.

    Ruling on the no-case submission filed by the defendant, Justice Egwuatu held that the witnesses presented by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) have been able to establish elements of the offence against Ojerinde that require him to enter a defence.

    He thereby ruled that the no-case submission failed and was dismissed.

    Justice Egwuatu further ordered Ojerinde to enter his defence and adjourned the matter to July 16.

    The ICPC is alleging that Ojerinde committed multiple frauds while heading the National Examinations Council (NECO) and JAMB.

    The former JAMB registrar was arraigned over allegations bordering on abuse of office and fraudulent diversion of funds from government coffers to the tune of ₦5.2 billion

    He, however, pleaded not guilty to all the counts.

    In the proof of evidence tendered before the court by the prosecution counsel, Ebenezer Shogunle, the ICPC also accused Ojerinde of conferring corrupt advantage upon himself at different times while he was the registrar and chief executive of JAMB and NECO, respectively.

    The allegations violate sections 19, 24, 25 (1) (a) and (b) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000, and section 1 (1) (1) (1)(b) of the Advance Fee Fraud Act, 2006.

    In February 2022, Ojerinde entered a Plea Bargain through his counsel, Ibrahim Ishyaku, but it failed, and the trial continued.

    The ICPC has closed its case after calling several witnesses to substantiate the allegations.

    But Ojerinde decided to file a no-case submission, which the court dismissed

  • Court bars Trump’s ban on foreign Harvard students

    Court bars Trump’s ban on foreign Harvard students

    A U.S. federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from enforcing a ban that would prevent Harvard University from admitting international students.

    Judge Allison Burroughs, based in Massachusetts, issued the restraining order, stating that Harvard—the oldest university in the United States—would suffer “immediate and irreparable injury” if the ban were implemented.

    The ruling follows a lawsuit filed by Harvard on Thursday, accusing former President Donald Trump of launching a “government vendetta” aimed at silencing free speech on campus.

    Trump defended the policy on national security grounds and criticized Harvard for allegedly failing to combat antisemitism among its student body.

    Judge Burroughs’ order came just hours after Harvard amended an ongoing lawsuit against the federal government, arguing that the president’s actions were “part of a concerted and escalating campaign of retaliation” against the university for exercising its First Amendment rights.

    Harvard President Alan Garber said in a statement that the university is preparing contingency plans for international students who may be unable to travel to campus.

  • Sad ! Ex- Federal High Court Chief Judge Abutu is dead

    Sad ! Ex- Federal High Court Chief Judge Abutu is dead

    A former chief judge of the Federal High Court, Daniel Abutu is dead.

    Abutu’s death was announced by the chief registrar of the Federal High Court, Suleiman Hassan on Wednesday, June 4.

    Having served as a FHC’s chief judge between September 2009 and March 2011, Abutu was committed to justice for all.

    “The federal high court regrets to announce the passing of our former chief judge, Honourable Justice D. D. Abutu, who served the court and the nation with distinction, integrity, and unwavering commitment to justice,” Hassan said.

    He also noted that all the divisions of the Federal High Courts have been directed to display Abutu’s portrait.

    This gesture, Hassan said is in honour of Abutu’s unprecedented legacy as the chief judge of the Federal High Court.

    According to him, the portraits are expected to be displayed in areas that are dignifying and visible within the courthouses.

    In addition, a condolence register is also expected to be opened at all divisions of the Federal High Court immediately.

    This will allow judges, staff and distinguished members of the bar the opportunity to eulogise the late judge.

    Hassan also stated that all information concerning Abutu’s funeral arrangements would be communicated through the appropriate channels in due time.

  • Court dismisses £990trn suit filed against CBN

    Court dismisses £990trn suit filed against CBN

    The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Wednesday, dismissed a 990 trillion pounds suit filed by a claimant, Mr Tunde Omosebi, against the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) for being incomprehensible.

    Justice James Omotosho, in a judgment, also held that the suit filed by Omosebi to seek redress over alleged breach of his fundamental rights, failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action against CBN and other defendants.

    Justice Omotosho, therefore, gave an order restraining Omosebi from filing any suit or process except same is filed by a legal practitioner or accompanied by a medical clearance from chief medical officer of National Hospital attesting to his state of mind and sanity.

    The judge also gave an order restraining all the registries of the Federal High Court of Nigeria from accepting any process from the claimant for purpose of filing except same is done by a legal practitioner or accompanied by a medical clearance from chief medical officer of National Hospital attesting to his state of mind and sanity.

    “This suit is hereby dismissed for not being a fundamental rights suit, for lack of reasonable cause of action against any of the defendants and for being incomprehensible,” he declared.

    Omosebi had, in the originating motion, sued the CBN Governor, Mr Olayemi Cardoso, as 1st defendant. He also joined the Chairman/Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc, Guarantee Trust Bank (GTB) Plc, Zenith Bank Plc respectively as 2nd to 4th defendants.

    Omosebi equally sued the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, and House of Representatives’ Speaker, Tajudeen Abbas, as 5th to 6th defendants in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/766/2024.

    In the originating motion dated June 5, 2024, but filed Jan. 29, the claimant sought six reliefs.

    Omosebi prayed that “an order be entered for the sum of 990 trillion pounds for traumatic torture and Enforcement of Fundamental Rights Rule, 2009 as guaranteed by the Constitution.

    “An order be entered that converts CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA to RESERVE BANK OF NIGERIA as guaranteed under SEC 212 of CRIMINAL CODE OF NIGERIA BANKS.

    He also sought 10 per cent interest on the total recoverable amount and N5million cost of suit.

    The claimant, in the course of proceedings, joined more defendants in his suit without the leave of court.

    Omosebi, who referred to himself as “His Majesty,” a businessman and a politician in the statement attached to the application, also said he was as “the Chairman, Federal Executive Council, and Prime Minister of Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

    He said he gets paid based on his role, projects and contracts executed by his businesses, investments portfolio as contained in the corporate resolution.

    “At the trial of this suit, the applicant shall rely on the terms of the corporate resolution and schedule of distribution,” he said.

    Omosebi alleged that the defendants breached the assembly industrial agreement/arrangement, denied his Fundamental Right (Enforcement Procedure) Rule 2009, Sections 35, 43, 45 and Fundamental Objectives and Directives of State Policy 14(2)(b) and 16(1)(a-b).

    According to him, approximately four years ago, the applicant opened and operates few corporate and personal accounts with defendants 2 with aim of managing these finance per the constitution.

    In a preliminary objection by the CBN governor’s lawyer, Favour Maikano, the lawyer argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter as the claimant had failed to disclose cause of action against her client.

    She said the suit was bereft of facts, hence, it was incompetent.

    The UBA, GTB, Zenith Bank, including the Senate President and the House speaker in their respective submissions, urged the court to dismiss the suit for failure to disclose cause of action against them.

    They argued that the claimant lacked the locus standi to sustain the action for the failure to disclose cause or reasonable cause of action against them.

    Delivering the judgment , Justice Omotosho held that two issues for determination “are whether the suit is competent or not and whether it discloses any reasonable cause of action.”

    He said in considering whether the claims of the plaintiff fell within Chapter 4 of the Constitution, the court looked critically at the reliefs to decipher if it really constituted fundamental right breach or not.

    “This court painstakingly read the reliefs and all the processes of the plaintiff and the more the court read, the more the court became confused as to what exactly the plaintiff was claiming.

    “There is no mention of the financial irregularities committed by the banks sued as defendants, including 1st defendant.

    “There is also no ground made out for the order to convert the ist defendant to the Reserve Bank of Nigeria neither is there anything to show why the other banks should be converted to DRIG Bank with the Corporate Affairs Commission,” he said.

    He said the court thoroughly researched the meaning of DRIG Bank without any result.

    “The court also researched if there was any legislation like Criminal Code of Nigeria Banks. It is clear that these reliefs do not relate to breach of fundamental rights.

    “Thus, this suit is incompetent as constituted as the claims and processes of the plaintiff do not make out a case for breach of fundamental rights,” he said.

    Looking at the second issue, the judge observed that a reasonable cause of action is a claim with some chances of success.

    According to him, it does not connote a watertight claim but one which when considered critically raises some legal questions for the court to answer.

    “Usually, courts do not bother themselves with academic suits but on cogent and reasonable suits. Where the cause of action is unreasonable, the court automatically loses its jurisdiction,” he said.

    The judge said a look Omosebi’s processes revealed he suffered no injury as a result of the CBN’s actions.

    “There Is nothing to show that the monetary policy of the 1st defendant affected him in any way, He has also not disclosed if his money was misappropriated by any of the defendants. The suit as a whole is simply a figment of the plaintiff’s imagination.

    “The entire processes are incomprehensible as it does not link any of the defendants to him in anyway,” he said.

    Besides, Justice Omotosho held that Omosebi also failed to provide any evidence to establish that he indeed operated few corporate and personal accounts with the defendants.

    “Also he did not place before the court how the defendants denied him access to the accounts. There is clearly no cause of action disclosed by the plaintiff against any of the defendants,” he said.

    Commenting on Omosebi’s behaviour, the judge said he observed that the plaintiff filed the suit on June 5, 2024 with only seven defendants and six reliefs.

    “On the July 10, 2024 the plaintiff filed a motion on notice where he added the Corporate Affairs Commission as 8th defendant and sought for nine reliefs without the leave of court.

    “Subsequently, on Nov. 17, 2024 the plaintiff filed a motion ex-parte where the defendants became 57 in number, including all the airlines operating in Nigeria, and further increased the reliefs to 19 from the original six reliefs,” he said.

    According to the judge, the plaintiff is simply trying to turn the rules of the court on its head through his confused and absurd amendment which are made without seeking leave of court to do so.

    “I observed that the plaintiff is not in the right frame of mind as expected of a reasonable person. He is psychologically imbalanced and not fit to present his case if any in court.

    “This court is a place of serious business and has no time to entertain frivolous and confusing suits. The time of this court is very precious and its docket is full of serious cases.

    “This court will therefore not waste any of its judicial time on a frankly incomprehensible suit filed by the plaintiff,” the judge said.

    Justice Omotosho also observed that Omosebi, in another suit filed against former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and others, equally exhibited the same behaviour.

    He said he observed that in the suit, he listed the address of the former vice president to be National Assembly Compkex, even when Atiku had never been a lawmaker.

    “The applicant claimed to be the Chairman of the Federal Executive Council as well as Prime Minister of Nigeria.

    “It is common knowledge that the chairman of the Federal Executive Council is the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which at this moment is President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

    “Furthermore, Nigeria does not have Prime Minister, thus the applicant is occupying a nonexistent position,” he said.

    Justice Omotosho described the act as “a typical summersault which the applicant has become notorious for.”

    “This plaintiff must be prevented from filing these frivolous suits except he can present a certificate showing that he is psychologically normal or if he files through a verified legal practitioner,” the judge said.

    It was observed that after the judge delivered the judgement, two senior advocates, who were in court for another matter, commented on the development.

    Mr Ikechukwu Ezechukwu, SAN, in his reaction, said he had never seen such a case before.

    “It gives me a reminder of Onitsha Market literature we read when we were small. I thank my lord for taking time to reading through this  trash,” he said.

    Ezechukwu, however, hailed the decision of the judge to bar Omosebi from further instituting suits personally any longer.

    Mr Sanusi Musa, SAN, said he would have called on the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to take action against the lawyer that filed the suit if it was a legal practitioner.

    “I was thinking who is this that filed this suit. This however calls for action that a fellow Nigerian is sick and lacks family support He is coming to ask before my lord the money that is more that the budget of Nigeria,” he said.

    Musa, however, suggested that the suit be sent to the National Assembly as a case study on the need to amend the nation’s law to guard against the filing of frivolous cases.

    “It serves as a case of retrospection as this suit should be sent to National Assembly for them to know that the law needs to be amended so that no nonsense suit is brought to the court, looking at the time my lord took to study and write the judgment,” he said.

  • Housemaid jailed 4 years for stealing employer’s money

    Housemaid jailed 4 years for stealing employer’s money

    An Ikeja Special Offences Court on Tuesday sentenced a house help, Comfort Jacob to four years imprisonment for stealing her employer’s money to the tune of N500,000 and 12,000 USD.

    Justice Rahman Oshodi also sentenced Comfort’s husband,  Isaac, to one year jail term for conspiring with his wife to steal from her employer.

    Oshodi sentenced the couple to four years and one year respectively, following their plea bargain agreement to the amended two-count charge of stealing and conspiracy.

    Oshodi said the offence Comfort committed represented a profound breach of trust.

    According to him, Comfort was employed as a house help, a position that requires the utmost integrity and honesty.

    He said: “Instead, you exploited your privileged access to your employer’s home to steal substantial sums of money.

    “Such offences are regrettably prevalent in our society, where domestic workers abuse the confidence reposed in them by their employers.

    “The impact of your actions extends beyond the financial loss and you have violated the sacred trust between employer and employee, potentially making other honest job seekers suffer suspicion and scrutiny due to your offence.

    “Your actions undermine the very foundation of domestic employment relationships.”

    The judge thereafter sentenced her to one year imprisonment on the count of conspiracy and three years on the charge of stealing.

    Oshodi, however, said the sentencing should run concurrently and the sentencing should begin from April 13, 2022, the day of her remand.

    The court further order that all items recovered from the convicts during the investigation be applied as restitution to the complainant, Mrs Omolara Dakore.

    The convict’s were initially arraigned on a six-count information comprising conspiracy, breaking and entering a dwelling house, and stealing. upon their arraignment on May 10 2023.

    They had pleaded not guilty and the Police Counsel, Mr Joseph Eboseremen had called an Investigation Police Officer (IPO), ASP Patrick Anthony, who testified as a prosecution witness one.

    The prosecution, bearing the burden of proof under section 135(1) of the Evidence Act 2011, called one witness and tendered three documentary exhibits.

    These included the convict’s confessional statements, which were admitted as Exhibits B and C following a trial-within-trial conducted to determine their admissibility.

    The witness had testified that in the petition, the complainant submitted that she employed Comfort as a house help on Feb. 9, 2022.

    “On February 11, 2022, when the complainant returned from church, she discovered that the house help was nowhere to be found and that a room she had locked before going to church was found open.

    “The complainant subsequently discovered that over N500,000 and $12,000 contained in a white envelope were missing from the said room.

    “One of the keys to the premises was also removed, and all efforts to locate Comfort were unsuccessful.

    “Comfort’s number was given to the tracking section, and both the husband and wife were eventually arrested on April 12, 2022 at Benin City and they were brought back to Lagos for further investigation.”

    According to the prosecution, the offences violate Sections 287(7) and 411 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State, 2015.

  • Court announces date to hear Diezani Alison-Madueke‘s asset forfeiture case

    Court announces date to hear Diezani Alison-Madueke‘s asset forfeiture case

    The Federal High Court, Abuja has fixed June 30 to hear the suit filed by former Petroleum Minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke challenging the forfeiture of her assets by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, (EFCC).

    At the resumed hearing of the matter on Friday, Alison-Madueke was represented by Mr Godwin Iyinbor from the chambers of Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN, but the EFCC had no representation in court.

    Inyinbor told the court presided over by Justice Musa Umar that Justice Inyang Ekwo, who handled the matter previously, had said on the last adjourned date that any party who prevented the definite hearing of the matter on the next adjourn date would pay cost.

    Justice Umar, however, said that since he was not the one who made that pronouncement, the anti-graft agency should be given another opportunity to appear in court.

    He ordered that hearing notices be issued and adjourned the matter until June 30 for hearing.

    In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/21/2023, which started in 2023, Alison-Madueke prayed the court to extend the time to apply for an order to set aside the EFCC’s public notice issued for the sale of her properties.

    In her application, she argued that the orders for the forfeiture of her assets were made without jurisdiction.

    She held  that she was denied fair hearing in the proceedings that led to the forfeiture orders.

    She sought five orders from the court, including the annulment of the EFCC’s public notice on the sale of her properties.

    She contended that the various court orders issued in favour of the EFCC violated her constitutional right to fair hearing as enshrined in Section 36 (1) of the 1999 Constitution.

    The embattled former minister said that she was never served with the charge sheet, proof of evidence or  summons regarding the charge against her.

    She claimed that the court had been misled into granting the forfeiture order due to the suppression or non-disclosure of critical information.

    The EFCC, however, prayed the court to dismiss her application on the grounds that she had been properly brought before the court.

    The anti-graft agency held that the application for final forfeiture of her assets had been properly instituted and conducted following all legal requirements.

    It said that the properties had been duly disposed of following the court’s order, which had been made in 2017 and which had not been overturned on appeal.

  • 18-year-old student remanded for alleged murder

    18-year-old student remanded for alleged murder

    A Makurdi Chief Magistrates’ Court on Friday ordered the remand of an 18-year old student, Joseph Chive, at a Makurdi Correctional Centre for allegedly killing a 14-year-old girl.

    Chive, who lives at Veterinary Layout, Northbank, Makurdi, was charged with illegal possession of firearms and culpable homicide.

    The Chief Magistrate, Mr Kevin Mbanongun, did not take the plea of the defendant for want of jurisdiction. He remanded the defendant and adjourned the case until Aug. 28 for mention.

    Earlier, the prosecutor, Insp Godwin Ato, told the court that  the defendant committed the offences on May 25, at Veterinary Layout, Northbank, Makurdi.

    He said the case was reported  at the ‘C’ Division Police Station, Northbank, Makurdi, by the deceased’s father, Mr Victor Ayom.

    According to him, the defendant had an altercation with the victim, a 14-year-old girl, Mimidoo Victor.

    “While the altercation was going on, the defendant rushed into his room, brought a loaded dane gun and shot the girl on the head.

    “The defendant was arrested during police investigation and he confessed to  the crime. The dane gun was recovered from him,” Ato said.

    The prosecutor said the offences contravened Section 3(1) of the Robbery and Firearms Act, 2004 and Section 222 of the Penal Code, Laws of Benue, 2004.

  • Court blasts EFCC for violating Man’s rights, awards N2 million in damages

    Court blasts EFCC for violating Man’s rights, awards N2 million in damages

    Justice A. Abdullahi of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court has ordered the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to pay N2 million in damages to Abubakar Isa for the violation of his fundamental human rights.

    In a judgment delivered over the weekend, the court ruled that the EFCC breached Section 35(3) of the 1999 Constitution in the arrest, detention, and interrogation of Isa. The court found the anti-graft agency acted unlawfully by failing to inform Isa, in writing and within the constitutionally required 24 hours, of the allegations against him.

    Justice Abdullahi also issued a restraining order, barring the EFCC, its agents, and representatives from further harassing, threatening, arresting, or detaining Isa without complying with the relevant constitutional provisions.

    In addition to the restraining order, the court awarded N2 million in damages to Isa for the violation of his rights.

    Isa had taken the EFCC to court through his lawyer, Femi Atteh, SAN, naming the EFCC Chairman, Mr. Olanipekun Olukeyede, and Mr. Bawa Kaltunga (Head of the AMCON Desk) as co-defendants. The claimant sought several reliefs, including a declaration that his arrest and interrogation—without formal written notice of the allegations within 24 hours—were unconstitutional. He also requested a court order to stop further rights violations by the EFCC or any of its affiliates.

    This ruling follows a related case from last year (Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/407/2024), in which Justice M. Olajuwon of the Federal High Court voided an earlier ex-parte order obtained by the EFCC to freeze Isa’s account. In that judgment, the court criticized the EFCC for failing to act in good faith and not fully disclosing facts when seeking the freeze order.

    “With the foregoing, it is apparent that in obtaining the court order, the applicant/respondent did not act in good faith and failed to make full disclosure, thereby preventing the court from appropriately dealing with the application,” Justice Olajuwon had ruled.