NAN-H-106
Enticement
Jos, Feb. 27, 2018 (NAN) Evangelist Danjuma Fwenji, Overseer of God’s Grace Divine Mission, Jos who is being tried for allegedly enticing a married woman, has asked a Bukuru Chief Magistrate’s Court in Plateau to strike out the case.
Mr Leonard Dilkon, a former member of the House of Representatives, had dragged the evangelist before a Chief Magistrate’s Court for allegedly enticing his former wife, Joy.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) recalls that a Plateau State High Court sitting in Jos dissolved Dilkon’s marriage to Joy on May 30, 2017.
Dilkon, in the case before Chief Magistrate Anderawus Maikai, alleged that the enticement resulted in the wife abandoning her matrimonial home, including her children, for the ministry of the evangelist, contrary to section 389 of the Penal Code.
When the case came up for hearing on Tuesday, the clergy, through his Counsel, Mr Smart Iraboh, filed a preliminary objection against it, praying the court to strike it out for being an “abuse of court processes.’’
“My Lord, we have before you a motion of preliminary objection to the suit filed against my client, who had been vindicated by a judgment issued by a State High Court Judge, Justice David Mann.
“Consequently, this court can’t confer jurisdiction on itself in a matter that has been decided by the High Court of Plateau, and which is on appeal at the Jos Court of Appeal.
“Sir, if you insist, this court will be accused of delving into a matter which is “res-judi-cata’’, and which amounts to an abuse of court processes,’’Iraboh said.
Iraboh, who filed a written address in support of his preliminary objection, prayed the court to strike out the suit for lack of merit.
But Dilkon’s Counsel, Mr Francis Okafor, objected to Iraboh’s applications, and urged the court to disregard the application and written address, which he described as “unnecessary’’ and an “obstruction of Justice.’’
Okafor argued that there was no word like res-judi-cata in criminal matters.
“`The word exists only in civil matters which was rightly adjudicated upon by a state High Court,” he said.
The Counsel said that res-judi-cata was a civil expression that had no place in criminal matter, which was why the defence counsel could not cite any law backing his submission.
“My Lord, the language of the two cases are different; while this is a criminal matter, the one in which judgment was issued was a civil matter and a case of adultery and not enticement.
“They have failed woefully to establish that this court could not and should not hear this suit. I urge your lordship to do the needful and dismiss the preliminary objection and allow us to continue with the matter,’’ Okafor said.
After listening to the arguments of the two parties, the Chief Magistrate adjourned the case to March 13, 2018 for ruling.
NAN reports that Dilkon had appealed against the judgment of the State High Court that dissolved his marriage with Joy.
Dilkon, in a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal, Jos, dated June 5, declared that there was a miscarriage of justice, and urged the appellate court to quash the judgment.
Justice Mann of High Court II, had, on May 30, 2017 dissolved Dilkon’s marriage to Joy, and dismissed his (Dilkon)’s adultery allegation against Joy and her Pastor, Danjuma Fwenji.
Mann also granted Joy’s prayers for free access to the three children from the marriage, both at home and in the school.
According to Dilkon, the judgment is not acceptable because it “went against the weight of evidence”.
“The court erred in law when it failed to properly evaluate my cross-petition seeking justice over Fwenji’s enticement of my wife.
“The High Court gave a very extraordinary attention to Joy’s petition, but failed and refused to consider my cross-petition; that effectively denied me a fair hearing.”
Dilkon, who did not contest the divorce order, particularly kicked against the order allowing his former wife to meet his children “anytime, whether at home or at school”.
“Since she is no more interested in me and the relationship, how can she just walk into my house just to see my children, anytime she likes? Is it not a recipe for trouble?
“Besides, the court gave her freedom to see the children anytime, citing the fact that we both had them, but left the sole burden of training them on my shoulders. I see this as contradictory.”
He urged the appellate court to set aside the entire judgment of the High Court, and take a deeper look into his cross appeal against Fwenji for “pulling my wife out of my house”. (NAN)
TYC/JIE/ETS
==========
Edited by Ephraims Sheyin