Wale Igbintade
A Federal High Court in Lagos has granted Nollywood actress Doris Ogala bail within the sum of N30 million in her alleged cyberstalking case involving Pastor Chris Okafor, whereas imposing strict situations barring her from harassing, intimidating or interfering with prosecution witnesses.
Justice Akintayo Aluko, in a ruling on the actress’s bail utility, ordered her launch on two sureties in like sum, emphasising the necessity to stability her constitutional proper to non-public liberty with the safety of the judicial course of.
The decide, who thought-about the applying dated October 26, 2026, and filed on October 27, 2026, exercised his discretion below Section 162 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) to confess the defendant to bail within the curiosity of justice.
As a part of the bail situations, the courtroom directed Ogala and her sureties to undertake to take care of good behaviour and chorus from attacking, harassing or intimidating prosecution witnesses or partaking in any conduct able to undermining the integrity of the proceedings.
The sureties are required to be house owners of landed property in Lagos State, with proof of correct registration on the state’s land registry, or fulfill the opposite eligibility classes specified by the courtroom.
They should additionally present letters from their employers testifying to their stability and credibility.
In granting bail, Justice Aluko underscored the constitutional presumption of innocence assured below Section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, noting that each accused particular person is presumed harmless till confirmed responsible.
The decide, nonetheless, careworn that bail was not an automated entitlement however a matter of judicial discretion, which have to be exercised judiciously, considering the circumstances of every case.
He defined that though bail constitutes an vital constitutional safeguard, its major function is to make sure that an accused particular person attends trial.
The courtroom additional emphasised the necessity to strike a stability between an accused particular person’s liberty and the safety of the administration of justice, notably towards attainable interference with witnesses.
Ogala had approached the courtroom by a 35-paragraph affidavit, alongside an extra 35-paragraph affidavit filed on October 29, 2026, in search of her launch pending the dedication of the legal cost.
In help of her utility, the actress argued that granting her bail would allow her to adequately put together her defence and pursue her political marketing campaign in one other state forward of the forthcoming basic election.
She additionally attributed her earlier absences from courtroom to well being challenges, disclosing that she had undergone gynaecological surgical procedure.
However, the prosecution opposed the applying, citing the character of the allegations and the potential of the defendant interfering with the continued proceedings.
It argued that the allegations concerned legal intimidation, reputational harm, injurious falsehood and cyberstalking.
The prosecution additionally questioned Ogala’s intensive social media actions during times she claimed to have been indisposed, contending that the circumstances raised issues about attainable evasion of trial, interference with proof and harassment of prosecution witnesses.
Ogala is going through a four-count cost marked FHC/L/220C/2026, filed below the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, and many others.) Amendment Act, 2024.
The prosecution alleged that between September 2024 and March 2026, the actress unlawfully revealed intimate pictures of Pastor Okafor with out his consent, circulated allegedly false and damaging allegations towards him, and used digital communications to bully, threaten and harass the cleric.
She was additionally accused of trying to extort property from the pastor by allegedly threatening to proceed publishing intimate and menacing supplies except he compensated her or purchased her a home.
According to the prosecution, the alleged conduct was meant to wreck the cleric’s status and expose him to public hatred, ridicule and opprobrium.
Justice Aluko adjourned the case until March 25, 2027, for trial.
