—-Threatens to strike out duplicate fraud charges

By Dayo Johnson Akure

Justice Toyin Adegoke of the Federal High Court, Akure Division, has criticized lawyers from the Ondo State Ministry of Justice for filing similar criminal charges against the same suspects in both the Federal High Court and the State High Court.

The judge described the practice as unacceptable and a clear case of double jeopardy.

The Ministry of Justice, through Mr. O.E. Akintan, filed charges of advance fee fraud against Messrs Adeboye Taiwo Bamigbaye, Samuel Adeboye, and Matthew Adeboye Bamigbaye before both the Ondo State High Court and the Federal High Court.

Counsel to the accused, Mr. S.A. Iluyemi, filed a preliminary objection asking the court to dismiss the suit.

He argued that it amounted to an abuse of court process to prosecute the same persons for the same offence in different courts.

According to the objection brought under Section 6(6) of the 1999 Constitution, the same complainant had earlier filed an information at the Ondo State High Court, Ondo Judicial Division, in Charge No: HOD/1C/2025 on January 27, 2025.

Iluyemi stated that the subject matter, issues, and parties in Charge No: HOD/1C/2025 and Charge No: FHC/AK/6C/2025 filed on February 27, 2025 are identical, making it a multiplicity of actions.

In an affidavit deposed by legal practitioner Toheeb Giwa, it was stated that the suspects — a father, wife, and son — were first arraigned before a Chief Magistrate Court in Ondo in Charge No: MOD/154C/2024 under the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences Act, 2006.

The court, lacking jurisdiction, remanded them in police and later correctional custody pending legal advice from the Directorate of Public Prosecutions.

They spent over two months in custody before being granted bail.

When the DPP’s advice was released, they were charged at the State High Court in HOD/1C/2025, with hearing fixed for November 12, 2025.

Despite this, the same charge was filed at the Federal High Court in FHC/AK/6C/2025.

The affidavit further stated that the fresh filing was done in bad faith “to harass, victimize, embarrass, and subject the Defendants to public ridicule and hazard, and to subvert the administration of justice.”

In his reply, Akintan told the court he had made efforts to withdraw the earlier charge at the State High Court to concentrate on the federal trial.

Reacting, Justice Adegoke said she would not condone double jeopardy.

She directed the Ministry of Justice to ensure the withdrawal of the state charge before the next adjourned date.

Adegoke, thereafter adjourned hearing and reply on the preliminary objection to September 22.