Court Dismisses Brothers-in-Law’s N10m Suit Against Widow, Police

Justice Yellim Bogoro of the Federal High Court in Lagos has dismissed a N10 million fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by two brothers, Chigozie Ubah and Tochukwu Ubah, against the Police and their late brother’s wife over alleged harassment and intimidation.

Justice Bogoro threw out the case for lacking merit, stating that the police acted within the law when they invited the applicants for questioning based on the petition filed against them.

The brothers had dragged their late brother’s widow, Mrs Ruth Ubah and the police before the court seeking a declaration that the intimidation, harassment and continuous threats of imprisonment against them regarding a purely civil matter, constitute a violation of their fundamental human rights.

They are also urging the court for an order restraining the police from further intimidating, harassing, arresting or detaining them concerning the property of the deceased, Chidozie Ubah, which is presently subject to an application for Letters of Administration pending before the Lagos Probate Registry.

The applicants further demanded compensatory general damages of N10 million, jointly and severally, against the respondents for unlawfully violating their rights as established under Chapter IV of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.

Other respondents in the case are the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), the Commissioner of Police (FIB) Force Headquarters (Annex), Supol Dare, Supol Samuel, and Inspector Ahmed Umar.

In their response, the police stated in their affidavit that their actions were based on an investigation regarding threats to the lives of Ruth Ubah and her children.

The respondents maintained that the rights of the applicants or their relatives had not been violated, arguing that the court could not restrain the police from carrying out their statutory functions.

In her counter-affidavit, the sixth respondent, Mrs. Ubah, argued that her actions did not violate the applicants’ fundamental human rights, claiming that the applicants rushed to the court to evade investigation and obstruct justice.

In her judgment, Justice Bogoro noted that the sixth respondent stated she reported a case of conspiracy to commit theft involving a Toyota Venza and a Range Rover against the applicants.

The judge held that the police have discretion in deciding whether to investigate any crime allegation, and if that discretion is exercised correctly, the court will not interfere.

The court further held that the evidence presented before it indicated that the respondents were duly executing their duties.