A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has adjourned the cyberstalking suit against actress Doris Ogala to June 9.
Doris is being prosecuted following a suit filed by Chris Okafor, founder of the Mountain of Liberty and Miracle Ministry. She was arraigned on a four count charge bordering on publishing personal materials without consent, dissemination of false information, cyberbullying and attempted extortion.
Proceedings were stalled on Thursday after the defendant failed to appear in court.
Prosecuting counsel Tolulope Mokuola informed the court of Doris’ absence and applied for a bench warrant, stating that she had been duly served with the hearing notice.
Responding, defence counsel Temiloluwa Akindayini said the actress was absent on health grounds.
“My Lord, the defendant is indisposed, having undergone a surgical procedure on April 21, 2026,” he said.
“She is currently in Abia state recuperating. An affidavit to that effect has been filed before this honourable court.”
Mokuola faulted the defence for not serving the affidavit ahead of the hearing and questioned the authenticity of the medical report presented.
Presiding judge Akintayo Aluko declined the application for a bench warrant, saying Doris should be given the benefit of the doubt since an affidavit had been filed.
The prosecution also asked the court to ensure that any future medical report is issued by a government hospital and that the defence be held accountable if the defendant fails to appear at the next hearing.
The matter was then adjourned to June 9.
The court had earlier barred Doris and social media activist VeryDarkMan from making references to Okafor and his ministry online.
Doris had alleged that she was in a relationship with Okafor from 2017 and ended her previous marriage at his urging. She accused him of later betraying her despite promises of marriage and demanded that he either marry her or pay compensation, eventually seeking N1 billion in damages.
Amid the dispute, Okafor married Pearl, initially dismissing Doris’ reaction as “the devil’s anger”. He later apologised and acknowledged their past relationship, but subsequently retracted the apology, claiming he was under pressure.
The case has drawn public attention, with both parties making claims and counterclaims before the court intervened to restrict further commentary online.
