Five persons have instituted a fundamental rights enforcement suit against Karma Agric Feeds and Foods Limited and three individuals before the Oyo State High Court, Ibadan Judicial Division, over alleged assault, physical violence and serious bodily injuries arising from incidents at the company’s premises on October 9 and 10, 2026.
The applicants, identified as Abiodun Gbolahan, Ridwan Olajide, Taiwo Yinusa, Alhaji Raji Adesina and Akinpelu Sharafa, are seeking appropriate reliefs under Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, and the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009.
The respondents in the suit, numbered M/891/2026, are Harjit Singh, Olowu Oluwadamilare, Sodeke Olamide and Karma Agric Feeds and Foods Limited.
In an update issued by counsel to the affected parties, Babatunde Jinadu, the applicants said efforts had initially been made to resolve the matter amicably before resorting to litigation.
According to Jinadu, a pre-action notice dated October 19, 2026, was served on the company, giving it a specified period to respond to the allegations. Following the expiration of the period, another letter dated October 30 was issued as a reminder, providing the company with an additional opportunity to address the issues.
He explained that although the company’s solicitors’ response was dated October 23, it was not received by the applicants’ solicitors until November 4, after the first notice and subsequent reminder had been delivered.
A further letter from the company’s solicitors, dated November 5, was also received by the applicants’ legal representatives.
In the October 23 correspondence, Dele Akinmusuti & Co., solicitors to Karma Agric Feeds and Foods Limited, denied the allegations and rejected a reported demand of ₦2 billion made against the company in connection with the incidents.
The company’s lawyers also rejected the description of the incidents as attempted murder, maintaining that their client did not accept the account of events presented by the applicants or the liability attributed to it.
They stated that the company had previously engaged with the owner of the affected trucks, as well as the driver and truck assistant, towards resolving the disagreement amicably.
The solicitors further disputed claims that trucks with registration numbers T203LA and T434LA were detained or unlawfully retained by the company, insisting that the vehicles had remained accessible to their owner and drivers and had since been removed from the premises.
On the preservation of evidence, the company’s lawyers confirmed that the complete CCTV footage covering the incidents had been preserved, including portions already circulating in the public domain.
They maintained that the company would rely on the complete footage rather than selected excerpts to establish what transpired.
In a subsequent letter dated November 5, the company’s solicitors reiterated their client’s willingness to pursue an amicable resolution and requested that the applicants’ lawyers propose a convenient date, time and venue for a meeting.
However, Jinadu clarified that no meeting had taken place as of the time of issuing the update because the correspondence from the company’s solicitors was only received on November 4 and 5, respectively.
The applicants have since proceeded with the fundamental rights enforcement action before the Oyo State High Court, seeking judicial intervention over the alleged violations.
Jinadu said the update was issued to clarify the sequence of correspondence between the parties and inform the public that the matter had now been brought before the court.
He added that, with the case now before the court, it would be inappropriate to comment further on the substantive allegations, evidence or respective positions of the parties.
He urged all parties to allow the judicial process to run its course and respect the court’s eventual determination, while leaving room for an amicable resolution.
One Comment