The ongoing custody battle between Afrobeats superstar Davido and Sophia Momodu has taken a sharp legal turn, as Momodu’s legal representatives have come forward to condemn what they describe as a wave of online intimidation. Punuka Attorneys & Solicitors, the firm handling the case for Momodu, issued a stern warning to the singer and his vocal fanbase, urging them to cease public commentary that could interfere with the judicial process.
The friction intensified following social media posts from Davido, where he expressed deep outrage over his deceased son being mentioned during court proceedings. The singer characterized the move by Momodu’s lawyer, Ebelechukwu Enedah, as a “low blow,” leading him to publicly announce his intention to withdraw his petition for joint custody of their daughter, Imade.
The law firm made it clear that they would not be intimidated by the singer’s massive platform or the reactions of his supporters. They emphasized that the matter is currently sub judice meaning it is under judicial consideration and should be debated only within the walls of the courtroom rather than on social media timelines. The firm noted that the integrity of the legal profession depends on lawyers being able to represent their clients without fear of public harassment or character assassination.
The firm is prepared to take further legal action if the public pressure continues. Their statement highlighted that they will deploy every lawful measure available to resist any attempt to undermine the proceedings or threaten their partners. They reiterated that interference with the administration of justice is a serious offense that carries significant legal consequences.
Davido, for his part, has maintained that his primary goal was never to take full custody but to secure a joint arrangement that would allow him to be present in his daughter’s life. His decision to pull back from the suit suggests a growing frustration with the legal system and the personal nature of the arguments being presented. As the dust settles on this latest exchange, the focus remains on how the court will handle the remaining aspects of the dispute amidst such a high-profile public fallout.
