Delivering judgment, Falola said that the plaintiff, Miss Helen Okpara, failed to tender enough exhibits to convince the court beyond reasonable doubt that she was raped by the monarch.
The judge also held that the plaintiff, who accused the monarch of raping her at his private residence in Osogbo, failed to prove that she was raped.
He said a case of rape could only be established with exhibits such as bed sheet, the victim’s pant and a medical report indicating forceful penetration, adding that the prosecutor failed to tender all these.
Falola said Okpara also failed to show the bruises on her private part as evidence that she was raped.
He further said the prosecutor failed to show to the court the plaintiff’s torn clothes as she had claimed in her submissions before the court.
While stressing that a case of rape must be proved with injuries sustained on the private part as well as other parts of the body, Falola said the court was not convinced that Okpara sustained any injury.
Falola said the court was able to establish the fact that Okpara and the monarch had been having regular sexual relationship before a misunderstanding ensued between them.
He, however, condemned such relationship involving a traditional ruler, saying his action had brought his stool into disrepute as well as disgrace to his family and community.
But Mr Femi Adedokun, the counsel to both Okpara and the state government, said he would seek advice from the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice before considering appealing the judgment.
On his part, the defence counsel, Mr Taofeeq Tewogbade, commended the judgment, describing it as “God’s judgment which came at the appointed time.’’
The case had been ongoing for almost three years before Tuesday’s judgment. (NAN)