The criminal case of alleged N620 million fraud against Rev. Israel Akanji, a former pastor of the First Baptist Church, Garki, Abuja, and five others was dismissed by a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja.
Advertisements
The court found not guilty the individuals who had been brought before it by the Inspector General of Police in connection with charge No. M/CR/1045/2025.
Justice John Aina’s decision followed a motion the defendants submitted asking the court to dismiss the five counts of forgery that the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) had brought against them.
Even without the police’s objection, Justice Aina found no prima facie evidence against the accused after reviewing the motion’s accompanying documentation.
The court concurred with the arguments made by Chief Niyi Akintola SAN, the defendants’ lead counsel, that an uncontested affidavit is considered an admission in law.
Justice Aina further took into account the fact that the prosecution had been provided with the motion and supporting affidavit since February 13, 2025, but had still chosen not to react.
He pointed out that the defendants’ motion did the same thing, questioning the court’s authority to rule on the case.
Because jurisdiction is the “live wire” and “foundation” of every case, Justice Aina ruled that the court must first reject jurisdiction before moving on.
He argued that the court is unable to move further because to a lack of jurisdiction, as the prosecution failed to file a counter-affidavit in response to the motion. All of the motion’s petitions were granted, and the defendants were released.
Speaking on behalf of the defendants, Mr. Bassey Effiong praised the court for its well-researched decision, even though the prosecution’s lawyer was absent. Chief Niyi Akintola SAN was not present in court.
Rev. Thomas Ekugbene Takpatore, Mr. Babatunde Adebayo, Mrs. Adenike Adebayo, Mr. Oladele Afolabi, and Mrs. Gloria Olotu are among the other defendants who were dismissed by the court.
The defendants reportedly violated Section 97 of the Penal Code in 2021 by conspiring to conduct a felony, according to the charge sheet.
In addition, the prosecution claimed that the defendants altered the church’s constitution between 2012 and 2021 and faked the signature of the late Barrister Akin Aina, who served as the trustees’ secretary and legal advisor.
Nevertheless, the defendants, represented by Chief Niyi Akintola SAN, asked the court to “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 in charge No. M/CR/1045/2025 and accordingly discharge the defendants” in a motion brought under Sections 6(6); 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution and Section 277 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015.
With the use of a written speech, six documents, and a sixty-paragraph affidavit, the defendants’ reliability and the validity of the charges against them were challenged in the application.
At the last adjourned date of February 13, 2025, Akintola moved the motion, arguing that the evidence presented did not establish a connection to the offences against the defendants.
According to the attorney, the church’s Board of Trustees did not request the prosecution to file the accusations against the defendants.
He informed the court that the prosecution had failed to submit a counter-affidavit to the petition to dismiss the charges, so he pleaded with the court to accept the contents of the affidavit as acknowledged facts.
The disappearance of anyone’s funds has not prompted any complaints. There has been no outcry from the roughly 5,000-member church about the disappearance of her funds. The proof of evidence doesn’t even include him; he’s completely on his own, Akintola argued.
Veronica Visan, the prosecutor, expressed regret for not being able to submit a counter-affidavit and asked for further time to do so in her response.
On the other hand, she informed the judge that the accused are facing charges stemming from police investigations.
However, Akintola, the defence attorney, strongly disagreed with her and begged the court to acknowledge that the case has been postponed multiple times at the prosecution’s request.