Court orders substituted service on bank chief, others over alleged N2.6b fraud
A FEDERAL High Court, Lagos yesterday granted leave to the Federal Government to serve criminal charges through substituted means to 15 accused persons and two companies charged with N2. 6billion fraud.
The accused are Nigeria International Bank Ltd, Chief C. S. Sankey, Emeka Emuwa, Adekunle Oladosun, Okechi Egwu, Lulu Ndubuka, Oyowole Ariyo, Ukabiru Bello, and J.E. Eriagbon,
Others are Samson Ebie, Steve Obodomechine, Mikky Dons Nig. Ltd, Mark Anaele, Peter Harris, Peter Oriade, Olusola Fagbure and Obianwa Chuba.
They are charged on 20 counts bordering on Conspiracy, intent to defraud, falsification of document, fraudulent alteration and diversion of over N2. 6 billion belonging to MicMerah International Agency Ltd.
The case, which was fixed for arraignment of the accused, was again stalled at the resumed date due to the absence of the accused in court.
When the case was called, only the first accused represented by its staff was present in court.
The prosecutor, Mr. Gordy Uche (SAN) then informed the court that the prosecution was still faced with difficulty in effecting service of the charge on the accused.
He, therefore, informed the court of an ex parte application, seeking leave of court to allow the complainant effect service of the charge on the accused.
Justice Ibrahim Buba granted the application and adjourned the suit to April 11 for continuation.
In the charge, the accused were alleged to have conspired to induce MicMerah International Agency Ltd, to deliver the said sum to them, to be used for offsetting a fraudulent import finance facility scheme.
They were also alleged to have falsified documents to fraudulently secure the release of four Volvo luxury buses and two 40 feet containers from the Nigeria Custom Service.
Besides, the accused are also charged with obtaining property by false pretence, as well as corruptly enriching themselves.
The offence is said to have contravened the provisions of sections 1(1) (a), 1(3), and 8 (a), of the Advanced Fee Fraud and Other Related offence Act, 2004.
The offence also contravened the provisions of sections 161, and 162 of the Custom and Excise Management Act, Section 516 of the Criminal Code Act, 2004 as well as sections 2, 2(1) and 10 (1) of the Recovery of Public Property Act, 2004.
No Comments yet