Burna Boy Catalogue: Court strikes out criminal charge against Aristokrat Records
A Federal High Court has struck out the criminal charge tied to the alleged secret sale of Burna Boy‘s early catalogue, faulting the police for what it called a lackadaisical approach to prosecuting one of the most closely watched music-rights cases in Africa.
The matter, Commissioner of Police v. Aristokrat Records Nigeria Limited & Anor (Charge No. FHC/L/1087/2025), came up for the arraignment of the defendant before Justice Kakaki at the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, today.
When proceedings opened, neither side’s principal actors were in court: the prosecuting counsel was absent because he was attending another matter at the Court of Appeal in Jos, while Aristokrat Records and its counsel were also missing.
An application was made for leave to address the court on the prosecuting counsel’s absence. The judge indicated he was not inclined to grant it, observing that the prosecution’s office ought to have delegated another lawyer to handle the day’s business rather than leave the matter unattended.
The court then went further, expressing open displeasure at the prosecution’s handling of the case. It noted that two different lawyers had, at various points, appeared for the police, yet the prosecution had still failed to serve the charge on the defendant.
Netng had earlier reported that the defendant had failed to appear for previous court sessions, leading the judge to issue an order of substituted service granted specifically to make that possible. With no satisfactory explanation for the failure to comply with that order, or for the failure to move the case toward arraignment, the court struck out the charge on the ground of lack of diligent prosecution.
It is a striking turn in a case defined, until now, by absence. As reported in the lead-up to the hearing, the defence side had not appeared at previous sittings, with the court variously told that the defendant had not been served or that service affidavits were filed late. This time, it was the prosecution’s own lapses that ended the criminal proceedings.
How Burna Boy’s early catalogue became the subject of a court case
The charge sat at the criminal edge of a wider dispute over who owns the recordings that launched Burna Boy’s career. At the centre is 960 Music Group, which holds a 40% stake in Aristokrat Records, the label that signed Burna Boy in 2011.
960 Music Group alleges that Aristokrat’s founder, Piriye Isokrari, sold the early catalogue to Burna Boy’s imprint, Spaceship Music, in 2024 without the knowledge or consent of its largest shareholder.
The catalogue includes L.I.F.E (2013) and Redemption (2016), along with the early singles that built Burna Boy’s Afro-fusion sound.
960 Music has alleged that proceeds from the multimillion-dollar sale never reached the company, prompting both a civil suit and the now-struck-out criminal charge over alleged fraudulent conversion.
Crucially, the strike-out does not settle the ownership question. A charge dismissed for want of diligent prosecution is a procedural outcome, not a verdict on the merits, and prosecutors can ordinarily apply to relist or re-file the case once the service and arraignment steps are properly taken.
It also leaves the larger fight untouched. The civil suit — 960 Music Ltd v. Aristokrat Records Nigeria Limited & Ors (FHC/PH/CS/188/2024) — remains live at the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt, where 960 Music is seeking to void the catalogue sale and recover the proceeds. The next hearing is due on
That arm of the dispute has already reached beyond Nigeria’s borders, with a formal legal notice served on Warner Music Group, the global distributor for Spaceship Music, demanding it suspend commercial activity on the contested albums.
For now, the criminal case is off the docket. The question of who truly owns the sound of early Burna Boy is not.
