A Lagos based medical doctor; Ojo-Adedeji Adeboye has called on the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Mohammed Adamu to obey the order of the Federal High Court, Lagos by returning the N22.9million and two vehicles unlawfully and forcefully taken away from him in the course of investigation of a civil matter involving him and his estranged wife.
Adeboye has therefore cried to President Mohammadu Buhari to prevail on the IGP to obay the Court order and return the money to him.
In a February 12, 2019 judgement by Hon. Justice C.M.A. Olatoregun, the court had granted all the reliefs sought by Adeboye in the application he brought before the court seeking for the enforcement of his fundamental rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
By a Motion on Notice dated December 7, 2017, Adeboye and his second wife Adedeji Aderemi Mutiat had sought for the enforcement of their fundamental rights sequel to their unlawful detention by officers of the Nigeria Police Force, Federal Criminal Investigation and Intelligence Department (FCIID).
Their detention was purportedly hinged on a petition written by Adeboye’s estranged wife Funke Ogunseye over the allegation that the sum of N163million Funke paid through Adeboye’s brother in South Africa for the supply of Apple fruits had been diverted.
The medical doctor whose younger brother resides in South Africa had linked up with the brother to assist Funke, his wife (when their marriage has not failed) in facilitating the payment for the shipment of containers of Apple fruits she was imported into Nigeria. She was said to have had foreign exchange problem which her husband’s brother offered to help resolve by going through a bureau de change in South Africa.
The first transaction was said to have been successful following which the suppliers of the Apple in South Africa made supplies of N163million worth of the product on credit. She was said to have subsequently paid the N163million into Nigerian bank accounts given to her by her husband’s brother. The money the equivalent of which was supposed to have been paid to the South Africa supply company did not reportedly get to the creditors.
It was based on the suspicion that her husband Adeboye may have a hand with the South Africa based brother that, Funke chose to write a petition to the Inspector -General of Police calling for an investigation.
According to the Federal High Court judgement, while the police have the statutory obligation to check-mate crime of any kind, the same police were not constitutionally authorised to infringe on the rights of persons who are suspected to be answerable to certain alleged offences as evident in the case of Ojo-Adedeji Adeboye and Adedeji Aderemi Mutiat both of whom were unlawfully detained by the police for one month and four days respectively.
In his judgement, Justice Olatoregun in granting the several reliefs sought by Adeboye and Mutiat, held that the police by law is not a debt recovery agent and therefore was wrong to have gone far in forcefully ordering the withdrawal of the total sum of N22.9million at three different times from Adeboye’s bank accounts and subsequently seizing his Lexus Jeep RX 330 SUV with registration number ,KJA 632 DX, Chasis number 2T2GA31U34COO3612, Engine number ,3MZ9415072 and Toyota Corolla Saloon Car with number , KTU 898 EP, Chasis number , INXBR32E53Z105618 and Engine number , IZZ5627959 and unlawfully transferred same to Funke Ogunseye.
The Court in giving the order also held that “the powers of the police to investigate crime does not extend to civil matters of contract and domestic matters of husband and wife by clothing same Criminal.”
In citing the case of Taiwo & Another v Akinbolaji & Another (2010) LPELR – 4998 (CA) while dismissing the preliminary objection raised by the police as a result of an earlier order of Hon. Justice Shagari, in Suit FHC/L/CS/1639/17 Justice Olatoregun, held that the Inspector -General of Police and his officers joined in the Suit FHC/L/CS/1878/2017 filed by Adeboye failed to show by credible evidence that an abuse of the judicial process occurred.
According to the judge also,
“I found from the facts presented in this case that this court has the jurisdiction and the competence to take the application for the infringement of rights complained of.”
