Tag: High Court

• Arrest warrant against bank staff dead on arrival—APC

The Association of Local Government of Nigeria (ALGON), Osun State, has commended the State High Court for granting an order to quash a criminal charge filed against United Bank for Africa (UBA) and three staff.

Osun State High Court sitting in Osogbo presided over by Justice Matthias Agboola on Friday in Suit Hos/M4/2026, granted an order in a Motion Ex parte to quash criminal proceedings against UBA and its staff at the Magistrate Court.

Earlier, the Magistrate A. A. Adeyeba, who is a party in the suit, had issued a bench warrant against some officials of the UBA despite the pending High Court matter, which prayed the court to quash the proceedings in the matter before the Magistrate.

Read Also: Individuals must file tax returns by March 31, employers, January 31 – Oyedele

Reacting to the development, the Osun ALGON Chairman, Hon. Samuel Idowu Abiodu,n lauded the High Court decision, saying the Leave granted to the UBA officials is an affirmation of the supremacy of the rule of law.

Abiodun who described the issuance of Bench Warrant against official of UBA as ‘bizarre’, saying: “It beats the imagination of any right-thinking member of the public in the fact that a whole Magistrate who is expected to uphold the rule of law would snub the same law and descend on innocent officials of the bank who have chosen to be law abiding by approaching the State High Court to vent their grievances over the Illegality being arranged at the Magistrate court.”

He therefore advised members of the public to remain calm and be law-abiding while the Illegality is being lawfully fought in the court of law.

Also, APC, through its Director of Media, Chief Kola Olabisi, in a statement on Saturday, said the bench warrant against UBA staff is dead on arrival and lauded the judiciary for granting leave to quash the criminal case at the magistrate’s court.

He berated Governor Ademola Adeleke for the display of ignorance over the controversial bench warrant order issued by an Osogbo Magistrate’s Court on Friday.

Olabisi said; “We commend the judiciary for granting the leave to quash the criminal charges against the financial institution UBA. One would have expected Magistrate Adeyeba to await the decision of the superior court over the determination of the validity of charge No. MOS/601c/2025, once the leave had been granted, but he refused to honour the ruling and went ahead to issue a bench warrant, which, in the eyes of the law, amounts to an academic exercise.

“It was disheartening that Adeleke’s government could needlessly resort to celebrating failure when it is obvious even to a layman that the order of the Magistrate Court was dead on arrival.

“We, as a party, are expressing displeasure over the negligence of the Magistrate to have ignored the pendency of Suit No. FHC/OS/CS/19/2026, in which the Magistrate is also a defendant, as instituted by the reinstated chairmen and councilors to challenge the illegality being perpetrated at the Magistrate Court over the purported charge.

“For clarity and avoidance of doubt, the ruling of the State High Court sitting in Osogbo has nullified whatever the decision that might have been taken by the Magistrate Court, which, by implication, is a nullity and mere academic exercise.”

The High Court of Justice of Delta State, Orerokpe Judicial Division, has granted an interim injunction restraining the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and the Nigeria Police Force from implementing and enforcing the tinted glass permit policy scheduled to commence on January 2, 2026.

The order was issued yesterday by Justice Joe Egwu following a motion ex parte filed by Mr. Israel Joe and argued by a legal team led by Kunle Edun (SAN).

In the suit marked HOR/FHR/M/31/2025, the court granted three key interim injunctions pending the hearing and determination of the substantive application.

The court restrained the first and second respondents, their officers, agents, privies and/or contractors from implementing, enforcing or further enforcing the tinted glass permit policy slated to take effect on January 2, 2026.

The court barred the respondents, their officers and agents from stopping, harassing, arresting, detaining, extorting or otherwise interfering with the applicant’s constitutional rights to dignity, privacy, freedom of movement and ownership of property, as well as those of other citizens and motorists, under the guise of enforcing the tinted glass permit policy.

Justice Egwu ordered substituted service of court processes on the IG and the police through the Commissioner of Police, Delta State Police Command, at the command headquarters in Asaba. The court ruled that such service shall be deemed good and proper service.

Read Also: JUST IN: Burkina Faso releases 11 detained Nigerian Air Force personnel

After hearing from counsel, the court granted the motion ex parte dated and filed December 17, 2025, as prayed.

The court has fixed December 24, 2025, for the hearing of the motion on notice.

Reacting to the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)’s strong rejection of the enforcement announcement, the police, in what appeared to be a contradiction to an earlier announcement to begin enforcement on January 2, stated: “The administrative communication issued on December 15, 2025, was intended solely to guide internal planning and enhance public understanding.

“It did not direct immediate enforcement actions, nor did it authorise conduct inconsistent with any subsisting court process.”

An Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan has dismissed a case of alleged defamation brought before it by Yoruba nation activist, Sunday Adeyemo, a.k.a Sunday Igboho, against the Aare Ona Kakanfo of Yorubaland, Iba Gani Adams.

In the case, with Suit No: I/406/2024, filed in 2024, Igboho prayed for an order compelling the defendant to pay N500 million as aggravated damages over a leaked audio conversation, which he claimed rubbished his reputation.

Among other prayers, Igboho sought “a declaration that the content of the audio clip between the defendant (Adams) and a third party named Nuru Banjo that took place sometime in November 2021 and further published on all new media platforms, including YouTube, is slanderous, libelous, and defamatory.”

Read Also: BUSINESS PERSONS OF THE YEAR: Femi Otedola: The turnaround guru

However, delivering her judgment in the high-profile legal battle, Justice Olusola Adetujoye, presiding at High Court 11, Ring Road, Ibadan, dismissed the case based on the Adams’s Notice of Preliminary Objection by his counsel, Tunji Ogunrinde, SAN.

Ogunrinde had questioned the competence and validity of the suit filed by Igboho, arguing that the claimant’s suit was unsustainable, having failed to follow proper procedures in initiating court actions.

After reviewing the arguments and documents before the court, Justice Adetujoye ruled that the claimant’s action suffered from fundamental defects, rendering it legally unsustainable.

The court, therefore, dismissed the suit in its entirety, effectively ending the matter at the trial court level.

The judgment marked a significant turn in the defamation case, which had generated widespread public interest since it was filed.

An Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan has adjourned till today, for further hearing of a suit involving the withholding of funds of the 30 local governments of Osun State in a suit involving the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and United Bank for Africa (UBA) PLC.

The court also extended its earlier order restraining the bank (UBA) PLC from paying, releasing or tampering with funds belonging to the councils.

According to the court, presided over by Justice Ladiran Akintola, the order will remain in force until tomorrow (today), when the matter is scheduled for further hearing.

Read Also: Osinbajo accuses Supreme Court of inconsistency

Justice Akintola said the extension became necessary to ensure parties in the case were granted the right to fair hearing, in line with Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

“The case is adjourned till Friday, October 10, 2025, for further hearing, while the interim injunction shall continue to subsist,” the judge ruled.

During the proceedings, counsel for the plaintiff, a learned silk, Chief Musibau Adetunmbi (SAN), informed the court that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had filed an application seeking to be joined in the suit.

He, however, says his team will oppose the application when it is brought before the court.

“Even though the PDP has a constitutional right to fair hearing under Section 36, we shall oppose their application for joinder. The case is narrow and straightforward; there is no need for multiple parties,” Adetunmbi said.

The senior advocate noted that Mr. Kasim Gbadamosi (SAN), who held the brief of Kunle Adegoke, SAN, for the APC ex-council chairmen, had filed a fresh application in addition to an earlier one on the same matter of joinder.

Responding, Gbadamosi said he intended to withdraw the new application, arguing that the issue of jurisdiction did not require a formal application.

He further argued that the case before the High Court amounted to an abuse of judicial process since a similar matter was already pending before the Supreme Court.

“The matter is premised on a case already before the Supreme Court and should therefore be struck out,” he said.

Addressing the court, counsel for UBA PLC, Mutalib Adebayo Ojo (SAN), aligned with the argument, urging the court to adjourn the case sine die (indefinitely), pending the determination of the matter at the apex court.

After hearing the arguments, Justice Akintola adjourned the case till today for ruling.

A second case on the same matter filed by the local government chairmen elected under PDP was also adjourned for hearing till today.

• Court declines bail for terror suspects

A Federal High Court in Abuja has declined the bail request filed by five men facing prosecution over their alleged involvement in the June 5, 2022, attack on St. Francis Xavier Catholic Church, Owo, Ondo State.

In a ruling yesterday, Justice Emeka Nwite dismissed their bail because they were not only charged with offences that are capital in nature, but they are also accused of being members of a notorious terrorist organisation.

Justice Nwite held that the defendants, who are alleged to be members of a notorious terrorist organisation, could intimidate witnesses, influence, and jeopardise the trial.

The judge agreed with the lawyers of the prosecuting agency, the Department of State Services (DSS), that the evidence against the alleged terrorists was strong and could not be overlooked.

He said the argument by the DSS that the defendants would jump bail was not disputed and deemed to be true.

Justice Nwite also upheld the prosecuting agency’s submission that the defendants did not establish having credible sureties that could stand for them pending their trial.

The judge also held that the arguments of the DSS that admitting the defendants to bail would amount to judicial risk were also not challenged by their lawyers.

He held that the defendants failed to give cogent and verifiable reasons why they should be allowed to go home pending their trial.

Justice Nwite subsequently dismissed the bail request.

Before going into the merit of the bail application, the judge had declared the Motion on Notice incompetent on the ground that the names of the five defendants were not listed on the motion paper, as required by law.

Read Also: Tinubu orders further crash in food prices

Also, the judge faulted the motion paper on another ground that a joint affidavit of two paragraphs was in support of the request for bail of the five defendants as against the position of law that each of the accused persons must have separate affidavits to back up the request for bail.

Granting an accelerated trial, Justice Nwite fixed October 19 for the commencement of the trial.

The bail application of the defendants, dated August 11, was argued by their counsel, Abdullahi Awwal Ibrahim, on August 19.

The five accused persons are: Idris Abdulmalik Omeiza, Al Qasim Idris, Jamiu Abdulmalik, Abdulhaleem Idris, and Momoh Otuho Abubakar.

Arguing the application, Ibrahim had submitted that the accused persons had assembled reliable and responsible sureties to stand for them.

But the DSS opposed the request through its lawyer, Dr. Callistus Eze, on the grounds that the accused persons might escape because of the gravity of the charges against them.

He urged the court to refuse the bail application and allow the defendants to remain in the DSS custody.

One of counts in the charge reads: “That you, Idris Abdulmalik Omeiza, Al Qasim Idris, Jamiu Abdulmalik, Abdulhaleem Idris and Momoh Otuho Abubakar adults, males, with others still at large, sometime in 2021, did join and became members of AL Shabab Terrorist Group, with cell in Kogi State and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 25(1) of Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.”

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.

Justice Kareem Adedokun struck out the name of the traditional ruler after prosecuting counsel, I. O. Abdulazeez, on the order of the Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice i, Mr. Abiodun Aikomo, applied for 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 defendants were brought to court on the adjourned date.

A complainant, Isaac Abiodun, decried the sudden twist, saying the action meant there was no justice for the masses in Oyo.

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

Read Also: Court hears $250m suit over Lagos Coastal road

He said the directive of the attorney-general was a travesty of justice and a 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.”