Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, on Thursday, May 7, 2026, dismissed the preliminary objections and bail application filed by the boss of Intermediate Investment Holdings Limited, Ufoma Joseph Immanuel, over an alleged $1.5 million fraud.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, on Wednesday, March 11, 2026, arraigned Immanuel, alongside his company, Intermediate Investment Holdings Ltd., on a two-count charge bordering on obtaining by false pretence and forgery to the tune of $1.5m.
Count one reads: “UFOMA JOSEPH IMMANUEL and INTERMEDIATE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LIMITED between April 2022 and October 2023 in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, with intent to defraud, induced Adebisi Adebut of R28 Holdings Limited to deposit the total sum of S1, 500, 000.00 (One Million, five Hundred Thousand United States Dollars USD) as investment described as to wit: “Cash and or Capital Cost in Chappal Petroleum Development Company Limited; Business Development Cost in Intermediate Investment Holdings Limited: Capital and or Capital Call in Chappal Energies Mauritius Limited” on the understanding that R28 Holdings Limited will be; (a) reimbursed the investment amount (b) paid a Development Capital fee of $2 250,000.00. (Two Million, Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars) (c) 22.4% worth of shares in Intermediate Investment Holdings Limited which representation you knew to be false.”
Count two reads: “UFOMA JOSEPH IMMANUEL, sometime between April 2022 and April 2025 in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, with intent to defraud, forged a document to wit: TERM SHEET and purporting same to have been executed by Sherrif Oluwo and Olaniran Osotuyi in order to facilitate your obtaining money by inducement from Adebisi Adebutu of R28 Holdings Limited.”
The defendant pleaded “not guilty” to the charge preferred against him.
Following the defendant’s “not guilty” plea, the prosecution counsel, Babatunde Sonoiki, asked the court to fix a date for the commencement of trial and also prayed the court to remand the defendant in the custody of the International Criminal Police Organization, INTERPOL, pending the conclusion of its investigation.
Sonoiki also narrated how the defence counsel, Oluseun Awonuga, SAN, had physically assaulted his colleague, Emenike Mgbemele, at the sitting on March 2, 2026.
According to him, “My lord, the learned silk, physically assaulted my colleague on the staircase on his way to serve the defendant the charge as directed by the court.
“There is a video to that effect and we intend to tender it before the court.”
Though Awonuga did not respond to the allegation made against him by the prosecution counsel, he informed the court of a preliminary objection and a written address dated January 5, 2026, while urging the court to discountenance the counter-affidavit of the prosecution.
The prosecution, in a 21-paragraph counter-affidavit dated February 9, 2026, had urged the court to dismiss the notice of preliminary objections.
According to Awonuga, the Federal High Court, in a ruling, had ordered the EFCC not to arrest the defendant.
“EFCC has flouted the order by arresting the defendant and I hereby urge your lordship to discountenance their counter- affidavit,” he said.
Responding, the prosecution counsel, Babatunde Sonoiki, said that the ruling was part of the motion that had earlier been withdrawn by the defence and should not be before the court.
“ There is nowhere in the ruling that says the defendants cannot be arraigned in a court of competent jurisdiction.
“My lord, the ruling was delivered in a civil case; and according to the Supreme Court, a criminal case and civil case can go on at the same time.
“We urge the court to dismiss the application and order accelerated hearing in this case,” Sonoiki had said.
After listening to both parties, Justice Dada had, consequently, adjourned the case till May 7, 2026 ( today) for ruling.
Ruling on the application , Justice Dada held that: “The preliminary objection is baseless and the entire application is lacking in merit; and it is hereby dismissed.”
Also, Justice Dada, in her ruling on the bail application of the defendant, held that “On the basis of considering the antecedent of the defendant for not honouring the invitation of the applicant after he was granted administrative bail, I agree with the complainant that he is a flight risk; therefore, bail is refused.”
Justice Dada adjourned the case till June 24, 26, 29 and 30, 2026 for the commencement of trial.
