A Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court has set aside all five- count charge bordering on allged N620m fraud against a former pastor of First Baptist Church, Garki, Abuja, Rev. Israel Akanji and five others.
The court presided over by Justice J. A. Aina of Gwagwalada Division discharged all the defendants in charge No M/CR/1045/2025 by the Inspector General of Police.
The ruling was sequel to a motion filed by the defendants, praying the court to quash the five-count charge of alleged forgery filed against them by the Nigeria Police Force (NPF).
Justice Aina ruled that a careful perusal of the exhibits attached to the motion which was not challenged by the prosecution did not disclose a prima facie case against the defendants.
The judge agreed with the submissions by the lead counsel for the defendants, Chief Niyi Akintola SAN, that an unchallenged or uncontroverted affidavit is deemed an admission in law.
Justice Aina equally considered that the motion was served on the prosecution since February 13, 2025 and yet has refused to respond to the motion and the affidavit in support of it.
He noted that the motion by the defendants equally challenged the jurisdiction of the court to adjudicate on the matter.
Justice Aina said since the issue of jurisdiction is the live wire and foundation of any case, the court cannot proceed further without first trashing the issue of jurisdiction.
He said since the prosecution did not respond to the motion by a counter affidavit, the court is legally hamstrung to proceed, as any decision taken without jurisdiction would be declared a nullity.
He accordingly granted all the prayers contained in the motion and discharged all the defendants.
Although the prosecution counsel was not in court, Mr. Bassey Effiong who stood in for Chief Akintola SAN, for the defendants, commended the court for what he described an erudite and well researched judgment.
Other defendants discharged by the court include Rev. Thomas Ekugbene Takpatore, Mr. Babatunde Adebayo, Mrs. Adenike Adebayo, Mr. Oladele Afolabi, and Mrs. Gloria Olotu.
According to the charge sheet, the defendants allegedly conspired in 2021 to commit a felony, violating Section 97 of the Penal Code.
The prosecution further alleged that between 2012 and 2021, the defendants forged an amended version of the church’s constitution, falsely attributing it to the late Barrister Akin Aina, who was the church’s legal adviser and secretary of the Board of Trustees.
However, in his motion brought pursuant to sections 6(6); 36 (5) of the 1999 constitution and section 277 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, the defendants, through their counsel, Chief Akintola SAN, prayed the court for “an order quashing all the five counts contained in the criminal charges dated December 13, 2024 and filed on December 20, 2024, preferred against the defendants/applicants in charge No M/CR/1045/2025 and accordingly discharge the defendants.”
The motion, supported by a 60 paragraphs affidavit as well as six exhibits and a written address, attacked the credibility and competence of the charge against the defendants.
Moving the motion dated February 13, 2025, at the last adjourned date, Akintola submitted that the proof of evidence did not disclosed any link to the offences charged against the defendants to them.
In addition, he argued that the defendants have committed no offence to require them to stand trial before any court of law.
He further submitted that the charge and proof of evidence constitutes gross abuse of the court processes as the prosecution has no standing against the defendants at the time of arraignment.
The defense counsel also said the petition and the charge against the defendants were not brought before the court at the instance of the Board of Trustees of the Church.
While describing the nominal complainant as a rabble rouser, Akintola told the court that what he was complaining about is not known to law but only out to embarrass the defendants.
He told the court that the prosecution did not file a counter affidavit to the motion seeking to quash the charges and urged court to deem the content of the affidavit as facts admitted by the prosecution.
Akintola cited the case law in Asari Dokubo Vs FRN (2007) 12 NWLR to support his argument that an unchallenged affidavit is deemed as an admission.
“My Lord, when there is no challenge to an affidavit, same is deemed as an admission.
“In the instance case, the prosecution has not responded to the motion which was served on them about four months ago even when the court has given them an opportunity to do so since March, 2024.
“My lord can see that the complainant is not ready and willing to come and prove his case. He is just a rabble rouser.
“Nobody is complaining that his or her money is missing. The church of about 5000 members is not complaining that her money is missing. He is just all alone and even the proof of evidence there is nothing there,” Akintola submitted.
In her response, the prosecution counsel, Veronica Visan apologised for the inability to file a counter affidavit and prayed for more time to enable her do so.
She however told the court that based on police investigation, the defendants have a case to answer.
However, her request was vehemently opposed by the defence counsel who urged the court to recognise that the matter has suffered several adjournment at the instance of the prosecution.
