Lagos ministry says pair were prosecuted over alleged armed robbery

The Lagos State Ministry of Justice says a teenager and an adult reported as being detained over slippers were instead charged with conspiracy to commit robbery and armed robbery. The defendants were discharged after the prosecution’s key witness failed to appear in court and testify.
The Lagos State Ministry of Justice has rejected a report that a teenager and an adult were detained solely over a pair of slippers, saying both defendants were charged and prosecuted in connection with an alleged armed robbery. The clarification was issued in a rejoinder by the ministry’s Director of Public Prosecutions, Adebayo Haroun, concerning charge number ID/22014C/23. Haroun said the defendants faced charges under Sections 299 and 297(2) of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.
According to the DPP, the defendants were alleged to have been part of a group that robbed a man, Daniel Lucky Danjuma, of an iPhone 13 Pro Max and a gold chain. The alleged attack was said to have involved men carrying a cutlass and a gun. Haroun said the case was filed on May 31, 2023, and initially assigned to Justice Adenike Coker of the Ikeja High Court.
It was later transferred to Justice Hakeem Oshodi in October 2025 after Coker received a national assignment. The defendants pleaded on October 13, 2025. The prosecution listed Danjuma and two police investigators as witnesses.
However, Haroun said repeated attempts to secure Danjuma’s attendance failed because his telephone was unreachable. Inspector Omozuafo Martins testified on December 10, 2025, but the prosecution later closed its case after further efforts to secure another witness were unsuccessful. The defendants subsequently filed a no-case submission.
Justice Oshodi discharged them on September 29, 2026, after adopting written arguments from both sides. Haroun said the ruling followed the absence of evidence linking the defendants to the alleged crime because the complainant did not testify. The DPP said prosecutors could not create evidence when a key witness failed to attend court.
He maintained that the slippers were part of the allegation identifying one defendant, not the basis for the detention or prosecution.
This independently written report is based on information supplied by the named publisher. Vertrix News has not independently verified the source report.