The Supreme Court has ordered the immediate return to prison of a Lagos-based businessman and socialite, Fred Ajudua, who is facing trial for allegedly defrauding a German company of $1.43 million more than 30 years ago.
In a unanimous decision delivered on Friday, the Supreme Court overturned the ruling of the Court of Appeal, which had granted Ajudua bail.
The apex court declared that the appellate court erred in granting bail to Ajudua and directed Justice Mojisola Dada of the Lagos State High Court to resume proceedings in the long-running case.
A source who spoke with Sahara Reporters said, “Ajudua escaped after the Supreme Court ordered that he should be returned to prison,” raising speculation about whether the businessman has fled the country.
Fred Ajudua’s legal troubles trace back to the early 1990s when he was accused of defrauding Ziad Abu Zalaf, a Palestinian businessman based in Germany, of approximately $1.43 million through an advance fee fraud scheme. The fraud was allegedly orchestrated in collaboration with an accomplice, Joseph Ochunor.
According to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ajudua and Ochunor fraudulently obtained $268,000 on April 2, 1993, and $225,000 on May 12, 1993, from Zalaf.
To lend credibility to their scam, the pair allegedly forged official receipts from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).
EFCC Charges And Legal Battles:
Following an investigation, the EFCC filed a 12-count charge against Ajudua before the Lagos State High Court. Despite multiple legal challenges, including an attempt to seek bail on health grounds, Ajudua’s application was denied by Justice Mojisola Dada, who ruled that he should face trial.
In response, Ajudua’s legal counsel, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), appealed the decision, and the Court of Appeal granted him bail.
However, the EFCC contested the ruling at the Supreme Court, which ultimately upheld the EFCC’s stance, stating that the appellate court had failed to properly consider the severity of the charges against Ajudua.
The Supreme Court, in its judgment on appeal number SC/CR/51/2019, delivered a decisive ruling, stating that the Court of Appeal lacked the jurisdiction to grant bail after Ajudua’s brief of argument was struck out for being incompetent.
The court concluded that any further consideration or ruling based on the invalid brief of argument was legally void and amounted to a futile exercise.
