A Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos, has struck out a criminal case linked to the controversial sale of Afrobeats star Burna Boy’s early music catalogue, faulting the police for failing to diligently prosecute the matter.
The dispute centres on the transfer of Burna Boy’s early recordings from Aristokrat Records to Spaceship Music, a company owned by the Grammy-winning artiste and his mother and manager, Bose Ogulu.
The legal battle began after 960 Music Group, which owns a 40 per cent stake in Aristokrat Music, challenged the transaction. The company argued that it was not consulted before the sale and subsequently sought to have the deal overturned.
The catalogue in question includes Burna Boy’s early projects, including L.I.F.E and Redemption, as well as several songs that played a significant role in launching his career.
As the disagreement intensified, the Force Criminal Investigation Department (FCID) filed criminal charges against Aristokrat Records founder Piriye Isokrari, alleging that proceeds from the catalogue sale were diverted from the company’s accounts, thereby denying 960 Music Group its entitlement.
The matter came up before Justice Kakaki for arraignment. However, when proceedings resumed on Wednesday, neither the prosecution team nor representatives of Aristokrat Records were present in court.
It was gathered that the lead prosecutor was handling another matter at the Court of Appeal in Jos, while the defence team was also absent.
A request was made to explain the prosecutor’s absence, but the court declined, stating that another lawyer should have been assigned to handle the case rather than allowing the proceedings to stall.
READ ALSO:
- CAF Awards 2026 To Hold In Lagos
- Burna Boy, IGP Disu Explore Ways To Improve Police-Public Relations
- I Ended The Relationship After Discovering He Was Married – Actress Irewole Olaniyan Spills
- ECOWAS To Deploy Youth Observers For Nigeria’s 2027 Elections
- Madonna University Expels Nursing Student, Suspends 14 Over Viral TikTok Video
The judge expressed dissatisfaction with the manner in which the matter had been handled, noting that despite previous appearances by different prosecutors, the charge had still not been properly served on the defendant.
The court observed that it had earlier authorised substituted service after the defendant failed to appear on previous hearing dates. Despite that directive, there was no evidence of compliance or any meaningful effort to move the case forward.
Consequently, the court struck out the criminal charge for lack of diligent prosecution.
The case had initially been mentioned in December 2025 and later adjourned to February and April 2026, but the defendant and legal representatives were absent on those occasions.
Although the criminal proceedings have now been dismissed, prosecutors may choose to revive the case if the necessary legal procedures are properly followed.
Meanwhile, the civil suit filed by 960 Music Group against Aristokrat Records remains active at the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt, where the company is seeking to nullify the catalogue transaction and recover proceeds from the disputed sale.