COURT ORDERS INTERIM FORFEITURE OF LAGOS PROPERTY LINKED TO N986M DIESEL FRAUD

Read Time:1 Minute, 48 Second

By Aishat Momoh. O.

The Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has ordered the interim forfeiture of a property in Isolo, Lagos, linked to an alleged N986 million diesel fraud.

Justice Deinde Dipeolu granted the order following a motion ex parte filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which alleged that the property was purchased with proceeds of a fraudulent Automotive Gas Oil (AGO) transaction involving one Hannah Ify Nwaguzor, her associate Ajayi Edward Olushola, and others.

The EFCC, represented by counsel Chinenye Okezie, told the court that the property located at No. 29 Oyindamola Shogbesan Street, Park View Estate, Ago Palace Way, was acquired using part of the N986 million allegedly obtained under false pretence.

According to the EFCC, Prince Chukwulota Benneth Onuoha and two companies G3 Solid Farms & Agro Allied Industries and Bohr Energy Ltd had petitioned the Commission, alleging they were defrauded in a diesel supply deal. They claimed they were introduced to the suspects in May 2024 by one Irene Abidemi, after which Bohr Energy Ltd transferred the funds to Mozann Global Merchants Ltd. However, the diesel was never delivered, and the funds were allegedly diverted.

Investigations revealed that N500 million of the funds was traced to Hola Jayu Nigeria Ltd, and N261 million was subsequently transferred to one Orobosa Michael Ubogu for the purchase of the property now under interim forfeiture.

The EFCC said the transaction contravened the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, and urged the court to preserve the asset pending the hearing of a motion for final forfeiture.

In his ruling, Justice Dipeolu directed the EFCC to publish the interim forfeiture order in a national newspaper, inviting any interested party to show cause within 14 days why the property should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.

The Commission, in its argument, referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dame Patience Jonathan v. FRN, stressing that an interim forfeiture does not require a criminal conviction but only a reasonable suspicion that the property is linked to criminal proceeds.

The case was adjourned to September 2, 2025, for hearing on the motion for final forfeiture.