The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Federal High Court convicts gospel singer, three others of cybercrime

    Federal High Court convicts gospel singer, three others of cybercrime

    A Federal High Court sitting in Ilorin, Kwara State and presided over by Justice Abimbola Awogboro has convicted a gospel singer and three others for offences bordering on cybercrime, conspiracy and misappropriation of funds.

    The Ilorin Zonal Directorate of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) brought the convicts before the court.

    The convicts are Otitoju Moses Sesan, a 31-year-old gospel singer, Ayodele Joseph Daisi, Adeoye Joseph and Abubakar Aliyu Abdulmalik.

    The court sentenced Otitoju to six months imprisonment without the option of a fine.

    Otitoju, who claimed in his extra-judicial statement to be a popular gospel performer at weddings, naming ceremonies and funerals in Lokoja, Kogi State, was found guilty of retaining the proceeds of unlawful activities amounting to over N8.4 million in his bank account.

    Read Also: Federal High Court to begin e-filing

    The charge against him reads in part:

    “That you, OTITOJU MOSES SESAN, sometime between October 2024 and December 2025, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did retain control of the gross sum of N8,404,339 in your UBA account, being proceeds of criminal conduct, thereby committing an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 17(a) and (b) of the EFCC Act, 2004.”

    Justice Awogboro sentenced Ayodele, who was found to have retained N243,750 in his UBA account, to eight months imprisonment without an option of a fine.

    His Techno 19 phone was ordered forfeited to the Federal Government.

    Adeoye, from Okene LGA of Kogi State, was handed eight months imprisonment without option of fine as well.

    He forfeited the sum of $220, an iPhone 13, and a Techno Pop 9 phone to the Federal Government.

    Abubakar was sentenced to six months imprisonment with an order of forfeiture of his iPhone 16 and Samsung S10 to the Federal Government.

    In a similar development, Justices Haleema Saleeman and Sulaiman Akanbi of the Kwara State High Court have also convicted Emeka Oluwatobi Achi, Isaac Babalola Oluwafemi, Afolabi Faith Olatoye, Zubeiru Zubeiru Junior and Abdulkadir Taofeek on charges including cybercrime and misappropriation.

    Justice Akanbi sentenced Abdulkadir to three years imprisonment with an option of a N500,000 fine and ordered the final forfeiture of N800,000, one iPhone 14 Pro Max, and a Samsung phone to the Federal Government.

    On her part, Justice Saleeman sentenced Emeka, Isaac and Afolabi to six months imprisonment each with an option of N100,000 fine.

  • Court declines request to stop NASS from approving Rivers’ appointments, budgets

    Court declines request to stop NASS from approving Rivers’ appointments, budgets

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a motion for an order to restrain the National Assembly from further engaging in any legislative activities including approving appointments or budgets of Rivers State Government under the current Sole Administrator, Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas (Rtd).

     Justice James Omotosho, in a ruling yesterday, held that the court could not grant the relief sought because the action the applicants intended to stop had been completed.

     Justice Omotosho noted that the main action that the plaintiffs were trying to restrain was to stop the defendants from passing the budget laid before the Senate by the administrator of Rivers State.

    He held that the court was aware that the Senate, on June 25, passed the budget of Rivers State submitted by the administrator.

     The judge held that the implication was that the act sought to be restrained is a completed one and proceeded to dismiss it.

    Justice Omotosho also held that some of the issues raised in the motion on notice are contained in the substantive suit, which would be better determined when the main suit is being decided.

     The judge adjourned till October 20 for the hearing of the substantive suit.

    The ruling was on the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1190/2025 instituted by some indigenes of River State and a group, the Registered Trustees of Hope Africa Foundation.

    Other plaintiffs are King Oziwe Amba, Chief Julius Bulous, Chief George Ikeme, Chief Amachelu Orlu and Prince Odioha Wembe.

     Listed as defendants in the suit are the National Assembly and Clerk of the National Assembly.

     Arguing the motion on July 9, plaintiffs’ lawyer, Ambrose Owuru prayed the court to restrain the defendants from further acting on any requests from the emergency government in Rivers State pending the determination of the substantive suit, challenging the legality of the state of emergency declared in the state by President Bola Tinubu.

    Owuru contended that the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State is without the required legislative approval because the voice votes adopted by the National Assembly in approving  the emergency rule was unconstitutional.

    Read Also: Dino Melaye makes ‘first court appearance’ as lawyer

    The plaintiffs stated in a supporting affidavit that since they filed the suit, the activities of the respondents “have centred on approvals of illegal appointments and budget made and forwarded by the illegal administrator foisted on the applicants Rivers State in the midst of protests and rising restiveness in the state.

    “The respondents, in spite of all the illegality and unconstitutionality of the foisted state of emergency on Rivers State outside the clear provisions of the 1999 constitution prohibiting state the emergency any part of the federating unit unless the governor of the state is aware and had failed to invite or request for such within a reasonable time, the respondents have engaged in constituting committees to run and spend funds of the applicants Rivers State.

     “Unless this honorable court grants this application, the defendants/respondents will continue in the illegalities and unconstitutionality of their invented ‘voice votes’ in place of the actual constitutionally approved two third votes to support the state of emergency in  Rivers State to engage in sheer political vendetta and promote political dispute and disorderliness among the citizens and Nigeria as a whole.

     “The grant of this application will protect and preserve the applicants legal rights to be governed by an elected government of their choice in the present democratic setting in Nigeria,” the plaintiffs said.

     In his counter argument, lawyer to the National Assembly and its Clerk, Mohammed Galadima urged the court to reject the motion for interlocutory injunction, arguing that it is without merit.

     The National Assembly and its Clerk stated, in a supporting affidavit, that the facts deposed to in the plaintiffs’ supporting affidavit to the motion “are contrived falsehood and calculated misrepresentation of the facts as they occurred.”

    They argued that there has never been any illegality in their actions and that there is no breach of the Constitution as alleged by the applicants/plaintiffs.

    The defendants also faulted the plaintiffs’ claim that the emergency rule was a violation of their fundamental rights to be governed by a democratically elected government.

    The National Assembly and its Clerk said they would be seriously prejudiced by the grant of the motion as it will create pandemonium and confusion in governance Rivers State. 

    They added that the grant of the motion will not be in the interest of justice.

  • Court strikes out murder, landgrabbing case against monarch

    Court strikes out murder, landgrabbing case against monarch

    An Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan has struck out the case of attempted murder and land grabbing instituted against the Oloko of Oko, Oba Solomon Akinola.

    The trial judge, Justice Kareem Adedokun, struck out the name of the traditional ruler after the prosecuting counsel, I. O. Abdulazeez, on the order of the Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice in Oyo State, Mr. Abiodun Aikomo, applied for the withdrawal of the case against the monarch, who is the second defendant.

    Adedokun adjourned the case till September 18 for continuation of trial of the remaining 14 defendants, ordering the defence counsel, Mr O. A. Okeyinka, to ensure all the defendants were brought to court on the adjourned date.

    In his reaction to the withdrawal, one of the complainants in the matter, Dr Isaac Abiodun, expressed sadness about the sudden twist in the matter, saying the action meant there was no justice for common man in the state.

    He said the withdrawal of Oba Akinola’s name, who was the principal suspect in the case from the charge sheet, more than a year after the prosecution had closed its case, was a sign of gloomy days ahead in the administration of criminal justice in Oyo State.

    Read Also: Court strikes out murder, land grabbing case against monarch

    According to him, the directive of the Oyo State Attorney-General to withdraw the case against Oba Akinola, the principal suspect in the case, is a travesty of justice and a very sad development.

    “This is a case in which overwhelming evidence of the Oba’s terror on Aagba village has been presented before the court and the court is not being allowed to dispense justice on him. This is somebody whose actions have brought about varying degrees of injuries to some people and total destruction of valuable property, whose amount cannot yet be ascertained.

    “In fact, we have tendered evidence of how Oba Akinola supervised the torturing of three indigenes of Aagba in his palace, beating and attacking them with a machete, at the court. Honestly, we are very sad and we can’t even continue work on our farm since the latest attack of burning down of the village.”

  • Firm denies role in social influencer’s court case

    Firm denies role in social influencer’s court case

    Real Estate firm, PWAN, has denied any involvement in the arrest and detention of one Social Media influencer, Scott Iguma, noting that while the matter was recently mentioned before Justice Oghazi of the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, reports linking the firm to his legal troubles are “false, malicious, and deeply misleading.”

    In a statement, the company stressed: “PWAN, as a private corporate entity, neither has the authority nor has ever exercised any power to arrest or detain any individual. The suggestion that we are responsible for Iguma’s legal challenges is entirely false.”

    According to the statement, the firm admitted that Iguma had, in recent months, waged a sustained smear campaign against the company but said it had responded with professionalism, restraint, and full adherence to legal channels.

    The company insisted that Iguma’s detention has nothing to do with the company.

    “Despite persistent provocations and the dissemination of falsehoods, we extended multiple invitations to Iguma for peaceful dialogue, offers he publicly declined, as evident in his social media posts.

    “Information available to us indicates that Iguma is being held for allegedly evading lawful police invitations and for a reported altercation with law enforcement officials at Panti. These events are unrelated to PWAN and occurred independently of any involvement or directive from our organisation.”

    Read Also: 36 commissioners oppose Senate-proposed Electricity Act Amendment Bill

    The company urged the public and media to stop amplifying “unfounded allegations” and warned against turning social media into a trial ground.

    “We must emphasise that social media is not an appropriate venue for resolving legal disputes or grievances. There are recognised legal and institutional channels for such matters, which PWAN has always respected,” he added.

    The firm reaffirmed its commitment to transparency and ethical practices in Nigeria’s real estate industry, stating:

    “PWAN remains firmly committed to integrity, the rule of law, and the continued advancement of Nigeria’s real estate sector through ethical, transparent business practices. Truth does not scream, it endures,” they said.

  • Court hears $250m suit over Lagos Coastal road

    Court hears $250m suit over Lagos Coastal road

    Justice Akintayo Aluko of the Federal High Court in Ikoyi, Lagos, on Thursday advised parties in the multimillion-dollar Lagos-Calabar Coastal Road dispute to avoid tampering with the property in question, noting that the court would not issue any interim order yet.

    The case, marked FHC/L/CS/1063/25, was filed by members of the Foreign Investors Network of Nigeria, a group of expatriate investors who claim ownership of an 18.8-hectare estate located at Okun-Ajah, Eti-Osa Local Government Area of Lagos State. 

    The estate, known as Winhomes Global Services Estate, is alleged to be under threat of demolition following the ongoing realignment of the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Road project.

    The plaintiffs accused the Federal Government and its contractors of “unlawful interference” with their property, alleging that the defendants “failed to follow due process” when altering the road’s alignment in a manner that now “cuts through the developed estate.” 

    They listed four defendants in the suit:The Attorney-General of the Federation who is the first defendant, The Minister of Works is the second defendant, The Controller of Works, Lagos is the third defendant, and Hi-Tech Construction Company Ltd. as fourth defendant.

    In their statement of claim, the plaintiffs said they are the “lawful owners” of the land, measuring approximately 18.8385 hectares, and that their title is backed by a Certificate of Occupancy and a valid survey plan (Plan No. BOM/3538/001B/2024/LA/TOPO).

    They further alleged that at no time were they given any statutory notice, demolition order, or opportunity to be heard before their property was allegedly marked for destruction. 

    This, they argued, constitutes a “gross violation” of their constitutional rights as guaranteed under Sections 36 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    The plaintiffs are asking the court to determine whether the defendants acted lawfully in realigning the coastal road between Chainage 16 + 500 and Chainage 17 + 500, an adjustment they claim brings the project into direct conflict with their estate. Among other reliefs, they seek:

    A declaration that the marking of their property for demolition without legal basis is unlawful, an injunction restraining the defendants from further acts of interference, and an order awarding $250 million in damages against the defendants jointly and severally.

    At the resumption of proceedings on Thursday, all parties were represented. However, the court confirmed that only the second and fourth defendants had been served with the originating processes. Plaintiff’s counsel, Valerian Nwadike, requested an adjournment to allow time for full service on all parties.

    Nwadike told the court that the defendants had already “started demolishing portions of the estate” and urged the court to intervene urgently to prevent irreparable damage. He stated:

    “My Lord, the defendants are not waiting for the outcome of this suit. They have begun taking steps to demolish our client’s property. We seek the protection of this court to prevent further destruction.”

    But counsel for the fourth defendant, Melchisedek Anselm, “denied the allegations,” insisting that “the subject matter is intact” and that the plaintiffs had “placed nothing before the court to substantiate these claims.” He said his client was only served the day before and was still within time to respond to the originating summons and any motion on notice.

    Read Also: Appeal Court affirms Kabir Ibrahim’s sack as Nigerian farmers’ association’s president

    Similarly, counsel to the first to third defendants, S.A. Usman, maintained that his clients had not yet been served with all relevant court processes and dismissed the plaintiff’s claim of demolition as “unsupported by evidence.”

    Justice Aluko, in a brief ruling, said:

    “The court has a duty to protect the res (the property in dispute), but as it stands, there is no proof before me that any demolition has occurred. Therefore, the court will not make any preservative order at this stage.”

    The judge stressed that the primary duty for now was to ensure proper service of court processes on all parties so that the matter could proceed fairly.

    The court adjourned the case until November 27, 2025, for further hearing. By that date, all defendants are expected to have been served with the originating summons and to file their responses.

  • Alleged N110.4b fraud: Court denies being in possession of Yahaya Bello’s passport

    Alleged N110.4b fraud: Court denies being in possession of Yahaya Bello’s passport

    The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) has declared that it does not have custody of the international passport of former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello.

    Justice Maryanne Anenih made the clarification on Thursday while ruling on an application by the former governor, who sought the release of his passport to enable him travel abroad for medical treatment.

    The judge stated that the court could not act on the application because the passport was not in its possession. 

    She further explained that even if the court were to approve the request, it would be ineffective, as the travel document is being held by the Federal High Court, not the FCT High Court.

    Bello is being prosecuted by before the HIgh Court of the FCT by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) with Umar Oricha (Director General, Kogi State Government House) and Abdulsalami Hudu on a 16-count charge. 

    The EFCC is, in the charge, alleging criminal breach of trust to the tune of N110.4billion.

    Read Also: Alleged N110.4b fraud: Court fixes July 17 to rule on Yahaya Bello’s overseas trip request

    Bello is also being prosecuted by the EFCC before a Federal High Court in Abuja on a separate charge of alleged money laundering.

    Bello had submitted the passport as part of the conditions attached to the bail granted him by both courts.

    According to judge, a review of the court’s record revealed that the applicant had previously been ordered to deposit his international passport and other travel documents with the Registry of the court.

    However, upon further enquiry and search conducted by the court, it was discovered that the said international passport was not presently in the custody of the court’s Registry, but with the Federal High Court. 

    Justice Anenih adjourned further hearing in the case till to October 8.

  • UPDATED: Court acquits Fayose of N6.9bn fraud charges

    UPDATED: Court acquits Fayose of N6.9bn fraud charges

    …EFCC prepares to appeal verdict

    Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke of the Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos, on Wednesday, July 16, 2025, discharged and acquitted former Ekiti State Governor Ayodele Fayose of all charges in the N6.9 billion fraud case filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), after upholding a no-case submission filed by the defence.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had re-arraigned Fayose and his company, Spotless Investment Limited, on July 2, 2019, on an 11-count charge bordering on money laundering and theft to the tune of N6.9 billion. The case was initially filed on October 22, 2018, before Justice Mojisola Olatoregun.

    At the last adjourned hearing on May 19, 2025, Fayose’s counsel, Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN, argued that the EFCC failed to establish a prima facie case against his client.

    He also noted that Abiodun Agbele, allegedly a co-conspirator in the transaction, was never charged alongside Fayose.

    “The predicate offences on which these charges are based do not hold water. Criminal breach of trust and conspiracy are distinct charges, yet no co-conspirator was docked with the defendant,” Agabi argued.

    Counsel to the second defendant, Spotless Investment Limited, Olalekan Ojo, SAN, also adopted the no-case submission.

    In response, prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, urged the court to dismiss the no-case submissions. He referred to a counter-affidavit and written address dated May 8, 2025, which asserted that the defendants had failed to explain the suspicious financial transactions adequately.

    Jacobs questioned why Fayose did not use his personal bank account if the transactions were legitimate. He further noted that EFCC investigator Abubakar Madaki had testified that Fayose used associates to purchase properties in Nigeria and abroad—associates who later denied ownership, despite Fayose claiming the properties in his statement.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Court frees Fayose of money laundering charges

    He also referenced the testimony of former Minister of State for Defence, Musiliu Obanikoro, who said Fayose personally requested the funds in cash and introduced Agbele to coordinate the delivery. Jacobs argued this required a defence from the accused.

    In his ruling, Justice Aneke held that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the defendants and consequently discharged and acquitted them.

    Following the verdict, Jacobs stated that efforts are underway to obtain the certified copy of the judgment and prepare grounds for an appeal.

  • Bayelsa High Court sentences four to death for murder of taxi driver

    Bayelsa High Court sentences four to death for murder of taxi driver

    A Bayelsa State High Court sitting in Yenagoa has sentenced four men to death for the murder of a taxi driver, Mr. Olarenwaju Ajayi, during a trip to Onne, Rivers State.

    In a judgment delivered on Thursday at the Bayelsa State High Court II in Onopa, Yenagoa, the presiding judge, Hon. Justice Patience Ama Zuofa Diri, in the suit number YHC/21C/2021: The State v. Sunday Imoh Essien, Opena Akpabio, Odogha Ebi, and Clifford Michael, found the defendants guilty for the offences of conspiracy, murder and armed robbery, and sentenced them to death.

    Read Also: AGF seeks adequate protection for whistleblowers

    The convicts had chartered Mr. Ajayi, a commercial taxi driver operating between Yenagoa and Port-Harcourt, under the guise of attending a naval programme in Onne, Rivers State.

    Mr. Ajayi picked them up at Agudama-Epie and headed to Onne.

    The journey, however, turned fatal at Okogbe in Rivers State.

    Under the pretence of easing himself, the first defendant, Mr. Sunday Imoh, asked the driver to stop the vehicle.

    Once he stopped, the other occupants of the vehicle launched a coordinated attack on Mr. Ajayi. They held him by the neck using a marine rope, and stabbed him to death.

    After committing the act, the convicts disposed of the body of the deceased and drove the stolen vehicle to Uyo, Akwa-Ibom State, where they sold it for N450,000.

    Bayelsa State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Biriyai Dambo, SAN, affirmed the state’s commitment to upholding justice.

    He emphasised that the conviction underscores Bayelsa State Government’s zero-tolerance for crime and its unwavering commitment to ensuring that criminals face the full weight of the law.

  • Alleged unlawful eviction: Court warns property developer, 2 others against evading arraignment

    Alleged unlawful eviction: Court warns property developer, 2 others against evading arraignment

     Justice Samira Bature of the FCT High Court in Maitama, has warned a property developer Cecil Osakwe and two others against evading arraignment.

    .Orakwe, Victor Giwa, and Edith Erhunmuuse were to be arraigned for alleged illegal eviction and damage to property worth N300 million.

    The case, has been adjourned five times for arraignment.

    Justice Bature gave the warning after Giwa sent a letter praying for an adjournment.

    ” This is the last time, No further excuses or applications for adjournment from the defendants would be entertained,” she said.

    Justice Bature then adjourned until Nov. 4 for arraignment.

    At the resumed sitting on Thursday ,only  Osakwe, was present in court.

    Earlier, the prosecution counsel, M.B Abubakar, decried the actions of the accused persons, describing it as “a persistent disregard for the court.”

    Abubakar told the court that the repeated absence of the accused persons was undermining the integrity of the proceedings.

    “This is the fifth adjournment. They are showing disrespect and must not be allowed to ridicule the court. We are applying for a bench warrant to compel their appearance,” he said.

    However, counsel to the second Giwa, Ogbu Aboje, opposed the application.

    He explained that his client lost two siblings recently, which necessitated his traveling, and he backed the claim with a flight ticket.

    He added further that Giwa’s lead counsel, Awa Kalu (SAN), had applied for an adjournment due to his involvement in a call-to-bar ceremony.

    Read Also: Court nullifies arbitration proceedings in Tempo Energy suit

    Osakwe in his part told the court that he has been in the court more than once.

    Abubakar disputed this claim, stating that Osakwe was not in court on the last adjourned date, March 17, “he wouldn’t have been in court and at the same time submitted a medical report.”

    Osakwe’ s lawyer , Chibunna Odiniru

    announced withdrawal of his legal representation.

    When the court demanded to hear from Osakwe, on his claim, he acknowledged facing three different charge and expressed frustration during the proceedings, prompting a caution from the judge.

    Justice Bature asked Osakwe directly whether he had secured new legal representation.

    Osakwe’s counsel Ogbu Aboje told the court that Awa Kalu SAN will represent the first and second accused.

    Noting the prolonged delays, the judge directed the court registrar to write to the Legal Aid Council to provide legal representation for the third defendant.

    The judge emphasised that no further excuses or applications for adjournment would be entertained.(NAN)

    (www.nanews.ng)

  • Court freezes Afex Commodities’ accounts over N17.8b debt

    Court freezes Afex Commodities’ accounts over N17.8b debt

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has restrained 60 banks from dealing with any accounts operated by Afex Commodities Exchange Limited, either in its name or in any other name connected to it, pending the determination of garnishee proceedings initiated by Guaranty Trust Bank (GTBank).

    The affected accounts are linked to various Bank Verification Numbers (BVNs) associated with the judgment debtor, Afex Commodities.

    The order followed an ex parte application filed on July 24, 2025, and was granted after submissions by GTBank’s legal team, led by Chief Ajibola Aribisala (SAN) and A. Adedeji (SAN).

    “Having carefully considered the application and the submissions of counsel, an Order Nisi is hereby granted as in Form 26 of the Judgment Enforcement Rules,” Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke ruled.

    The judge restrained the 60 listed banks, referred to as garnishees, from dealing in any way with the affected accounts pending their showing cause why the order should not be made absolute.

    The court further directed all the banks to, within seven days of being served, disclose under oath full details of all accounts maintained or operated by Afex Commodities and linked to the relevant BVNs.

    The matter was adjourned to July 18, 2025, for mention.

    The garnishee order follows earlier interim relief granted to GTBank on May 27, 2024, when the same court approved a Global Standing Instruction (GSI) to allow the bank to temporarily take control of funds and assets belonging to Afex Commodities Exchange over its alleged indebtedness of N17.808 billion under the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN)-driven Anchor Borrowers’ Programme.

    Read Also: Edo: S/Court rules today in Ighodalo’s suit against Okpebholo’s election

    GTBank, in its suit marked FHC/L/CS/911/2024, claimed that the sum includes N15.766 billion in outstanding principal and accrued interest as of April 17, 2024; pre-judgment interest at the CBN-approved rediscount rate of 28 per cent from April 18, 2024, until judgment; post-judgment interest on the same amount; N2.041 billion for recovery costs and incidental expenses.

    GTBank is the sole plaintiff in the suit, with Afex Commodities Exchange as the defendant/respondent. Twenty-seven commercial banks and all other deposit money banks were listed as nominal respondents.

    According to a 285-paragraph affidavit deposed to by GTBank staff member, Ifeoma Esemudje, the loan was granted for nine months to finance smallholder farmers registered under the CBN’s Anchor Borrowers’ Programme.

    Repayment was expected from the proceeds of maize production, with a maturity date of April 22, 2021.

    However, GTBank alleged that Afex failed to fulfil its repayment obligations under the facility.