From Godwin Tsa Abuja
A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, will on Monday, June 2, deliver ruling in an application by a former pastor of the First Baptist Church, Garki, Abuja, Rev. Israel Akanji and five others seeking to quash a five- count charge of alleged forgery filed against them by the Nigeria Police Force (NPF).
Justice J.A. Aina, sitting in the Gwagwalada division of the court fixed the date last week after counsel to the defendants, Chief Niyi Akintola (SAN), moved the motion in urging the court to quash the charges.
Akanji is standing trial alongside Rev. Thomas Ekugbene Takpatore, Mr. Babatunde Adebayo, Mrs. Adenike Adebayo, Mr. Oladele Afolabi, and Mrs. Gloria Olotu on charges of conspiracy, forgery, and criminal misappropriation of church funds.
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 Niyi 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 does not disclosed any link to the offences charged against the defendants to them.
In addition, he argued that the defendants have committed no offence as 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 this time of arraignment.
That 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 is complaining about is not known to law as he is 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.
He 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 apologized for the inability to file a counter affidavit and prayed for more time to enable her do so.
She however told the court that from based on police investigation, the defendants have a case to answer.
But her request was vehemently opposed to by the defence counsel, Akintola who urged the court to recognize the fact that the matter has suffered several adjournment at the instance of the prosecution.
He re-emphasised the fact that an unchallenged counter affidavit is deemed an admission of facts.
After listening to submissions of counsel, Justice Aina fixed June 22 for ruling on the motion.