The police have arrested the Director of Investigation and Prosecution with the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA), Mr Joseph Eriki, and one Boniface Agwu over allegations of forgery.
While Agwu is the first defendant in a nine-count charge filed by the Federal Government, marked FCT/HC/CR/87/2025, bordering on alleged criminal conspiracy, criminal trespass, and forgery, Eriki is the third defendant in the case, reports Nigerian Tribune.
The case is charged before Justice Suleman Belgore of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), sitting at Garki, Abuja.
Justice Belgore had on 27 May issued a bench warrant against all the defendants in the case to compel their appearance before the court for their arraignment.
The bench warrant was issued following an application to that effect by the prosecuting counsel, David Kaswe, who told the court that all efforts made by the prosecution to ensure their appearance in court for arraignment proved abortive.
Apart from Agwu and Eriki, others affected by the court’s bench warrant are Ikechukwu Kanu; Donatec Electrical Company Limited; Super Structure Limited; Weatherfield Engineering; Marine Service Limited; Asher Information Services Limited; Prince Isaac Omoluwa; Nwaimoneye Augustine Onyisi; and Sarajo Aliyu, Ogbole Michael.
The defendants were alleged to have unlawfully entered Plots 461–470 and 486–496 belonging to Etha Ventures and put up structures with the intention of defrauding the company.
According to the prosecution, to actualise their intent, the defendants fraudulently secured a consent judgment in suit number FCT/HC/CV/240/2018, granting the title of Plot 1406 (461–470 and 486–496), Sabon Lugbe East Layout, Abuja, to Super Structures Limited.
Following the issuance of the bench warrant against the defendants, at the proceedings of 4 June, counsel for the first, second, third, fifth, and ninth defendants, C.S. Ekeocha and E.E. Apeh, promised to produce their clients in court for arraignment.
Justice Belgore, however, restated the court’s earlier order for the arrest of the defendants despite the assurances given by the counsels.
On Friday, July 18, when the arraignment was rescheduled for the fourth consecutive time, the judge adjourned the matter to 30 October for possible arraignment of the defendants and further reiterated the court’s order issued in May for their arrest.
