Olusanya is being tried earlier than a Lagos Federal High Court over an alleged N152 million property fraud.
Justice Musa Kakaki admitted the letter as evidence in a ruling on Thursday. The choose, nevertheless, rejected three different paperwork dated January 10, January 11, 2024 and December 15, 2024, holding that they had been photocopies and had not been correctly defined by the witness who sought to tender them.
The ruling adopted objections raised throughout the earlier proceedings on July 20, 2026, when the prosecution sought to tender them by means of the nominal complainant, Anthony Ugbebor.
On the February 5, 2024 offer letter, the choose rejected the objection that Ugbebor was not the maker of the doc.
“One of the grounds of the objections of January 10, January 11, and December 15, 2024, was that the documents are photocopies. On July 20, 2026, the witness, through whom the documents were to be tendered, did not give any explanation of where the original documents were.
“I also considered the submission of counsel on the document dated February 5, 2024, an objection of admissibility, that the nominal complainant is not the maker of the document, as there is no such provision. The document dated February 5, 2024, is hereby admitted in evidence,” the choose held.
Following the ruling, prosecuting counsel, Chief Superintendent of Police Monday Omo-Osagie, knowledgeable the courtroom that he had an interim software prepared for listening to, including that the defendants had been served and had filed responses.
However, counsel for the primary defendant, Adeleke Agboola, SAN, questioned the prosecutor’s standing, saying he had obtained info that Omo-Osagie had retired from the police.
Agboola mentioned the prosecutor wanted to make clear whether or not he was showing beneath a fiat, including that he was not served with the interim software in his workplace.
“I was not served with the interim application by the prosecutor. When I informed him this morning that he ought to have served my office, he told me that he was not obliged to serve me, adding that he had served the first defendant.
“The case before the court today was a ruling and continuation of trial. He should call his witness or close his case, so that the defendant can open his case,” Agboola mentioned.
Counsel for the second defendant, Jude Ehiedu, additionally requested the prosecutor to make clear whether or not he was showing beneath a fiat.
The prosecutor added that the applying involved the nominal complainant’s well being and was distinct from an earlier software in search of permission for the witness to testify nearly as a result of he was not resident in Nigeria.
Justice Kakaki, nevertheless, mentioned he had not seen the applying within the courtroom file and directed the prosecutor to test the registry to ascertain whether or not it had been correctly filed.
When the case resumed, Omo-Osagie instructed the courtroom {that a} search on the registry confirmed that the applying had been despatched to the courtroom and signed for by a registrar in Kakaki’s courtroom recognized as Elizabeth.
“My lord, this is not the first time this will be happening; this is the second time in a series. I would really like something to be done,” he mentioned, earlier than presenting one other copy of the applying to the courtroom.
The prosecutor subsequently moved the movement on discover, dated September 18 and filed on September 21, 2026.
He mentioned the applying was supported by a 12-paragraph affidavit and a written tackle, which he adopted in urging the courtroom to grant the reliefs sought.
Ehiedu objected to the prosecution’s response to the defendants’ counter-affidavits, arguing that the prosecutor had not filed a reply on factors of regulation.
Omo-Osagie mentioned he had solely obtained the primary and second defendants’ responses electronically on Monday.
Counsel for the primary defendant, Benson Nwosu, who stood in for Agboola, argued that the sooner software, which the courtroom dismissed on June 23, 2026, sought digital testimony as a result of the nominal complainant was outdoors Nigeria.
He mentioned the prosecution might attraction the sooner choice quite than file one other software in search of considerably the identical reduction.
Nwosu additionally argued that the prosecution ought to shut its case if the witness couldn’t seem in particular person. He urged the courtroom to dismiss the applying, whereas counsel for the second defendant adopted the primary defendant’s arguments and urged the choose to succeed in the identical conclusion.
After listening to the events, Justice Kakaki adjourned the case till December 3, 2026, for ruling on the applying.
