Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court, Ikeja, on Thursday refused to grant bail to Ufoma Joseph Immanuel and his company,
Intermediate Investment Holdings Limited over an alleged $1.5 million fraud.
Earlier, the court also dismissed the preliminary objections filed by the boss of Intermediate Investment Holdings Limited.
Justice Dada delivered the ruling on the applications filed by the defendant on January 5, 2026.
The judge refused the defendant bail application on the ground that he is a flight risk, citing his failure to honour the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC invitations after being granted administrative bail was indicated a likelihood of absconding.
According to the judge, “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.”
Regarding the notice of the preliminary objection, the court held, “The preliminary objection is baseless and the entire application is lacking in merit, and it is hereby dismissed.”
The defendant and his company was arraigned by the EFCC, on Wednesday, March 11, 2026, on a two-count charge bordering on obtaining by false pretence and forgery to the tune of $1.5m.
One of the counts read: “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 Adebutu of R28 Holdings Limited to deposit the total sum of $1,500,000.00 (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.”
Another count 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.”
At his arraignment, the defendant pleaded not guilty to the charge preferred against him.
Subsequently, the EFCC 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.
The prosecution alleged that the offences contravene provisions of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, as well as the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.
According to the charge, the defendants allegedly induced Adebisi Adebutu of R28 Holdings Limited to invest the sum under the guise of financing projects linked to Chappal Petroleum Development Company Limited, Intermediate Investment Holdings Limited, and Chappal Energies Mauritius Limited.
The prosecution alleged that the investment came with assurances of reimbursement, a development capital fee of $2.25 million, and a 22.4 per cent equity stake in Intermediate Investment Holdings Limited representations it said were false.
The defendant was also accused of forging a document described as a “Term Sheet,” purportedly executed by Sherrif Oluwo and Olaniran Osotuyi, to facilitate the alleged fraud.
The Defence Counsel, Olawale Akoni, SAN, at the proceedings on Thursday argued that a prior ruling of the Federal High Court had restrained the EFCC from arresting the defendant, alleging that the agency violated that order.
The Prosecution Counsel replied that the said ruling arose from a civil matter that had since been withdrawn and did not preclude criminal proceedings.
Sonoiki said that both civil and criminal matters could proceed simultaneously, urging the court to dismiss the objections and order an accelerated hearing.
He further told the court that the defendant disappeared after he was granted administrative bail by the EFCC, thereafter, became the fugitive of law.
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 the EFCC counsel, “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 today for ruling.
He argued that the defendant might tamper with the proceedings if granted bail.
Justice Dada adjourned the case till June 24, 26, 29 and 30, 2026, for the commencement of trial.
