The father of late singer Mohbad, Mr. Joseph Aloba, requested permission to halt the DPP’s legal advice and court proceedings that had freed Naira Marley and Sam Larry on allegations that they were involved in Mohbad’s death. The Lagos High Court sitting in Ikeja has set the date for July 2, 2025.
Justice Taiwo Olatokun set the hearing date after hearing arguments from the respondents’ attorneys, Mr. Aloba, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Wahab Shittu, and Joke Amachree, who represented the applicants, for and against the application.
The Aloba family is suing the applicant, Mr. Joseph Aloba, while the respondents are listed as the Attorney General of Lagos State and the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP).
Wahab Shittu, the senior advocate, cited a lack of fair hearing as one of the justifications for the application.
Mr. Aloba claimed in his application that the DPP’s legal advice, which had just finished its investigation into the late Mohbad’s cause of death, pre-empted the coroner’s inquest, which is still pending.
He noted that the DPP’s legal counsel allowed the coroner to release key suspects who were involved in the coroner’s investigation.
Ayinde Ibrahim, a legal assistant in the DPP’s office, claimed in their counter affidavit that the suspects who were released by the Legal Advice were not acquitted but were only released after being charged with a crime against Mohbad’s father.
The deponent claimed that one Mr. Akinde Oluwaseun, a Chlef State Counselor in the Directorate of Public Prosecution, gave him information about the circumstances surrounding the case.
Ibrahim states in the document that “the Respondents accept paragraphs 8 of the Affidavit-in-support of the Motion only in the circumstances where the Police Investigators have conducted an investigation into the death of the Deceased and where the Office of the 2nd Respondent (DPP) has received a duplicate case file for review and issuance of a Legal Advice.”
The suspects who were released by the second respondent’s Legal Advice were not acquitted but were only discharged, contrary to the deposition in Paragraph 4 and generally in the Applicant’s affidavits.
The Respondents dispute the deposition in the seventh paragraph of the Applicant’s supporting affidavit because the Presiding Coroner has not yet rendered a decision involving the suspects who have been released.
Also available are Bezos and Sanchez’s Whirlwind Romance in The Billionaire and The TV Anchor.
The respondents sought to dismiss Mr. Mohbad’s application in the name of justice, tracked the steps involved in getting the DPP’s legal advice, particularly the criminal case file, and came to the conclusion that there was no information that directly or indirectly linked Naira Marley, Sam Larry Prima Boy, and Opere Babatunde, who had no access to it, which served as the catalyst for the DPP’s decision to release them.
He claimed that Oluwaseun Akinde Esq., in contrast to the deposition in Paragraph 8 of the Applicant’s affidavit, was lying. According to his experience as a lawyer, the Police is required to provide the Respondents with the duplicate case file in all cases where a prima facie case of an offense, such as the one under reference, is disclosed, is disclosed.
The Respondent adds that in addition to the above, the Respondent asserts that there was no directive that the Presiding Coroner issued at the time of the Deceased’s death.
the respondents to inform it of the second respondent’s evaluation of the duplicate case file, which is the conclusion that the legal advice contained.
sought to have the applicant’s objection rejected.
The Honourable Presiding Coroner was not informed of the second respondent’s request to halt its statutory review of the casefile or the first respondent’s order to do so.
whenever the Legal Advice was ready to be released.
The respondents further assert that the Police investigators were the ones who presented the suspects to His Honour Mrs. A. O. Olatunbosun in remand proceedings while awaiting the Directorate of Public Prosecution’s and DPP’s advice.
The Police Investigators did not receive any instructions from His Honour, Mrs. A. O. Olatunbosun, or the First Respondent, nor did they have any statutory duty to inform the Presiding Coroner that the Duplicate casefile had been forwarded to the Office of the Respondents.
The Respondents and the Police are independent from the fact that they are investigating the death of the deceased.
Deputy Coroner in charge.
The Respondents are only able to answer the Presiding Magistrate, who was the recipient of the legal advice when it was sent.
According to a police case file, the Presiding Coroner’s intervention in the death of the Late Lloyola Oladimeji Aloba is different from the Respondents’ statutory duty to follow.
While the Presiding Coroner’s task is to determine who is the deceased, when the deceased died, where the deceased died, and how the deceased died, the respondents’ duties, particularly those of the second deceased, are as follows.
to check whether any of the suspects’ allegations of prima facie criminal inferences were made against them in the duplicate case file that was sent to it.
The Respondents vehemently rejects the motion’s paragraphs 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15, and assert that the arguments therein are true.
The applicant’s imagination alone, putting him in the position of having the strongest evidence against the allegations, is what they are putting him to.
Further, “The Respondents assert that neither the Applicant nor the Presiding Coroner have access to the criminal case file to find and understand.”
the legal justification for the decision that the Respondents made in the legal advice.
“The Applicant did not personally conduct any searches or engaged private investigators to look into and discover incriminating evidence that supports the application.”
any of the people who received legal advice from the second respondent for the death of his son.
There was no fact that was made known that Mr. Abdulazeez Fashola a.k.a. a Naira Marley, Mr.
Directly or indirectly related to and for the decedent’s passing are Samson Balogun Eletu a.k.a. Sam Larry, Owoduni Ibrahim a.k.a. Prima Boy and Opere Babatunde.
The Respondent and the witnesses who gave testimony at the Inquest hearing into the deceased’s death did not provide any fresh, credible, and verifiable information in contrast to what was stated in the casefile that the Police investigators had sent to the second respondent and directly or indirectly connected Mr.
To the death, Owoduni Ibrahim a.k.a. a Prima Boy and Opere Babatunde, Abdulazeez Fashola a.k.a. a Naira Marley, Mr. Samson Balogun Eletu a.k.a. a Sam Larry, Mr.
of the late Oladimeji Aloba, Lloyola Olafoyo.
