Court strikes out criminal complaint for incompetence and gross irregularities; awards monetary sum to the first defendant

A Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Chief Magistrate Court has rebuked a complainant, identified in court with a different identity as Adebimpe Audullai Mosadoluwa.

The lady, known as Adebimpe Abidemi Ogunjimi, through her valid means of identification and the UK electoral roll, used the name Adebimpe Audullai Mosadoluwa in court proceedings before the Magistrate Court In Suit No. CR/25/20225

The Court found the action to be an abuse of court process, incompetent, and lacking jurisdiction, and struck out the complaint in its entirety, thereby dismissing and striking out a direct criminal complaint filed against popular actress Lizzy Anjorin and one Shakira Ayobami. The Court also awarded costs against the complainant.

Magistrate Sunday A. A. Adukwu characterized Suit No. CR/25/2025 as a “shaky” legal exercise and a “gross abuse of court process,” ultimately awarding a monetary sum to the first defendant as a penalty for the meritless litigation.

The legal battle reached a climax when the court scrutinized the credentials of the complainant. While she instituted the suit under the name Adebimpe Audullai Mosadoluwa, it was established through valid means of identification and records from the United Kingdom electoral roll that her true identity is Adebimpe Abidemi Ogunjimi.

Represented by her counsel, Yakubu Eleto, Ogunjimi had leveled serious allegations against Anjorin and Ayobami, including criminal defamation, acts likely to breach public peace, and the presentation of false and malicious statements.

But the the first defendant, through her lawyer, A.U.E. Ogboi, countered the suit by filling a preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the complaint.

Anjorin predicted her objections on one ground, which was: “Whether given the circumstances of this case, this honourable court has powers to entertain the direct criminal complaint in CR/25/25”.

While the Complainant raised two issues, which were: “Whether the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?

(Continued in the comments).