Offa robbery: Court strikes out motion to stop continuation of trial over Saraki, others’ case
KEHINDE AKINPELU ILORIN
The Court of Appeal, Ilorin Judicial Division presided over by Hon Justice Ridwan Maiwada Abdullahi JCA on Thursday struck out a motion seeking to stop the continuation of the trial in the Offa robbery matter.
The matter was between Alabi Olalekan Vs The People of Kwara State; Olubukola Abubakar Saraki, Abdulfatah Ahmed and Yusuf Abdulwahab.
- Advertisement -
J. A Mumini (SAN) appeared with Ms. Atolagbe for the applicant/4th respondent. Chief R.O. Balogun (SAN), Chief Dr. Oniyide (SAN), appeared with Dr. Mrs. SI Mustapha, N.A Sulyman Esq, IS Sheu, Esq, H.O Busari Esq and Rahmat A. O Esq for the 1st respondent.
K.K Eleja SAN for the second respondent appeared with S.O. Bello and AA Isa while R.O Muhammed appeared with A.A. Agbaje and A.R. Abdurahman. for the third respondent.
The case was for hearing
Mumini (SAN) mentioned all the process before the courts; the Appellant’s brief and motions. Balogun (SAN) also mentioned the processes filed before the court: respondent’s, notice of preliminary, brief of argument, and counter affidavit to the motion of the appellant. He proceeded to remind the court that all pending interlocutory applications before the court should be heard before the appeal.
Mumini withdrew the motion for interim injunction while Balogun withdrew the counter affidavit filed in opposition to the motion. The court consequently struck out a motion which sought to stop the court from proceeding with the matter.
Balogun later moved and adopted the motion for preliminary objection filed on 9/11/26 and urged the court to strike out the needless appeal.
Mumini also moved the counter affidavit filed on 11/11/26 in opposition to the motion for preliminary objection.
He then proceeded to move the appellant brief of argument as shown on page 1146 on the records of appeal and prayed the court to allow the appeal and further order the CJ of Kwara state to reassign the case to another judge.
Balogun moved the respondent’s brief filed on 2/11/26 and adopted the submissions therein.
The learned silk, however, pointed out that the page 1146 relied on doesn’t have any certification, no receipt and no signature of the judge who signed the ruling nor his name. He further stated that the prayer of the appellant for the case to be reassigned would set a bad precedent if granted.
He explained that the issue which brought the prayer for reassignment is that the court ordered for arraignment of the parties for which there is no issue. Hence the Learned silk urged the court to refuse the application.
The other respondent had no objection to the prayers of the appellant.
The court reserved judgment on the matter.
DemocracyNewslineNewspaper November 12th, 2026
