The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission had dragged Audu and his company, Genting International Limited, before the court on a seven-count charge bordering on conspiracy, retention of stolen property, forgery, and possession of fraudulent documents.
The two defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges.
According to the EFCC, the defendants conspired to retain the sum of $1,262,000 in USDT in a Binance wallet and another $1,300,203 in a BYBIT wallet, both alleged to be proceeds of fraudulent transactions.
The anti-graft agency also alleged that the sum of N3.5bn was retained in Genting International’s Union Bank account and that the defendants forged a document titled “Ultimate Beneficial Ownership Declaration Form,” purportedly signed by one Mr. Baffale Yakubu.
At the resumed hearing of the case on Monday, EFCC counsel, Mrs Bilikisu Buhari, informed the court that Genting International Limited did not have a representative in court and that the company was no longer operational.
She noted that the charges were served on the company’s last known address, as reflected in the Corporate Affairs Commission status report.
But a lawyer, Mr Henry Eziamaka, who appeared for Genting International, told the court that he had not been fully briefed.
The prosecution then requested the court to enter a not-guilty plea for the company under Section 257 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law.
Following the pleas, Audu’s counsel, Dr Muiz Banire (SAN), urged the court to adopt his client’s bail application, along with a further affidavit and written address.
He argued that the charges were similar to those already pending before the Federal High Court in Lagos, where Audu had previously been granted bail.
He added that counts 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the current suit were identical to those already before that court.
However, EFCC opposed the bail application, maintaining that the current charges were distinct.
Buhari told the court that the Federal High Court matter focused on money laundering, cyberterrorism, and mutual legal assistance, while the present case involved forgery and retention of criminal proceeds.
The prosecution also questioned the credibility of Audu’s supporting affidavit, noting it was deposed to by a litigation clerk who claimed to have received information from Audu’s driver.
EFCC disputed the claim, citing its visitors’ log, which showed that Audu had no visitors on the date referenced.
Banire challenged the EFCC’s assertion, stating he was never served with a copy of the visitors’ register.
The EFCC further alleged that Audu, sometime in 2024, knowingly forged the UBO Declaration Form and falsely attributed it to Mr. Baffale Yakubu.
It held that the alleged offences contravened Sections 328, 365, and 411 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2011, and Sections 6 and 1(3) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006.
After hearing arguments from both parties, Justice Rahman Oshodi ordered Audu’s remand at the Kirikiri Medium Correctional Centre pending the ruling on his bail application.
Oshodi J., however, adjourned the bail ruling and trial to June 2 and 3, 2025.
