Ruling for the bail application filed by controversial social media influencer and relationship therapist, Okoro Blessing Nkiruka, popularly known as Blessing CEO, has been reserved for June 9, 2026.
Justice D.I. Dipeolu of the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos fixed the date on Friday at the commencement of the defendant’s trial.
Recall that the defendant is standing trial over an alleged N36 million fraud.
The defendant is standing trial over a two-count charge filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, bordering on obtaining money by false pretence and stealing to the tune of N36 million.
During the hearing of the bail application, the defendant’s counsel, P. I. Nwafor, urged the court to grant his client bail on the most liberal terms.
However, counsel to the prosecution Suleiman Suleiman, countered the application stating that the EFCC had filed a 28-paragraph counter-affidavit deposed to by the investigating officer, Bufa Regina Okangbe, on May 29, 2026.
“We rely on all the depositions contained therein and the exhibits attached. At some point during the course of the investigation, the defendant stopped honouring invitations extended to her by the Commission.
“We urge Your Lordship not to accede to the request of the defence and instead order an accelerated hearing of the matter,” Suleiman argued.
Following the arguments by both parties, Justice Dipeolu reserved ruling on the bail application until June 9, 2026.
Earlier in the proceedings, the prosecution presented Bufa Regina Okangbe, an investigator with the EFCC.
The first prosecution witness narrated that the complainant paid N36 million for the lease of a six-bedroom duplex in Lekki, Lagos, a property not own by her.
According to the EFCC’s witness, investigations revealed that the property belonged to Thomas Osobu and not Blessing Okoro.
The EFCC tendered bank records showing transfers from the defendant’s accounts, ranging from N8 million to Thomas and Jumoke Osobu, N11 million to her mother, Lina Uzoma Okoro, N15 million to Kenneth Emeka Onuora, and N1.9 million to Beauty City Lekki.
Okangbe to the court that the Commission received a petition which was assigned to her team for investigation.
The investigator stated that a Bank Verification Number, BVN, search conducted on the defendant revealed several bank accounts linked to her.
“Following this, letters of investigation were sent to the banks, while another letter was forwarded to the Lagos State Land Bureau to determine whether the property belonged to the defendant.
“The Commission also wrote to the Corporate Affairs Commission, CAC, regarding the defendant’s company, Break or Makeup Limited.
“After analysing the defendant’s statements of account, she was invited to the Commission’s office and confronted with transactions traced between her and the complainant.”
Okangbe further testified that the defendant made statements under caution in the presence of her lawyer and husband, admitting that the complainant paid her the sum of N30 million.
The witness told the court that the response from the Lagos State Land Bureau revealed that the property in question did not belong to the defendant but to one Mr. Tunbosun Osobu.
“The Commission invited Mr. Osobu, who appeared with his lawyer and son. He confirmed that he had leased the property to the defendant for three years and that the lease expired in 2023 before it was renewed in 2025,” she testified.
Okangbe also informed the court that the complainant submitted the lease agreement executed between the complainant and the defendant, along with a tenancy acquisition form.
During the proceedings, counsel to the prosecution sought to tender several documents through the witness, including the petition dated February 18, 2025, as well as statements made by the defendant on December 10, 11, 12, and 16, 2025; the tenancy acquisition form submitted by the complainant’s lawyer; the complainant’s Zenith Bank statement of account in the name of Pipes and Barrel Limited; and the defendant’s GTBank and Access Bank statements.
However, the defendant’s counsel P. I. Nwafuru objected to the admissibility of the defendant’s statements, arguing that there was no endorsement indicating the presence of a legal practitioner during the recording of the statements.
Her lawyer also contended that no video recording of the statement-taking process had been produced before the court.
Responding, Suleiman argued that the absence of a legal practitioner did not render an extra-judicial statement inadmissible.
“The law only requires the presence of a legal practitioner or any person chosen by the defendant. The statements are very key to this matter, and we urge My Lord to admit them in evidence,” he submitted.
In respect of the the bank statements, Suleiman maintained that all statements of account were accompanied by certificates of identification in compliance with Section 84 of the Evidence Act.
“The witness through whom the statements of account are being tendered is the investigating officer in this case, and the law recognises such authority as an exception to the hearsay rule,” the prosecution counsel added.
In the short ruling, the trial judge overruled the objections and admitted the documents into evidence as exhibits.
Justice Dipeolu held that: “Section 17(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) clearly provides that a suspect’s statement may be taken in the presence of a legal practitioner of his or her choice, a representative of the Legal Aid Council, a representative of a civil society organisation, or any other person chosen by the suspect.”
Continuing her testimony, the prosecution witness stated that the complainant, through the company account, paid a total sum of N36 million to the defendant.
According to Okangbe, N25 million was transferred into the defendant’s GTBank account, while an additional N11 million was paid into her Access Bank account for the lease of a property located at No. 1B Tunbosun Osobu Street, Lekki, Lagos.
The first prosecution witness further testified that an analysis of the defendant’s bank accounts revealed several subsequent transfers, including N8 million to Mr. and Mrs. Osobu, N1.9 million to Beauty City by Lekki, N11 million to Lina Uzoma Okoro, the defendant’s mother, and N15 million to Kenneth Emeka Onuora.
During cross-examination, the witness stated that the Federal Republic of Nigeria, being the complainant in the criminal proceedings, was not privy to any settlement arrangement allegedly entered into between the defendant and the nominal complainant.
Okangbe also informed the court that she was unaware of any attempt by the defendant to refund N24 million to the nominal complainant, as earlier claimed by Blessing CEO ‘s lawyer.
The witness also stated that the complainant had already commenced renovation work on the property before the owner, Mr. Tunbosun Osobu, allegedly appeared and ejected them from the premises.
The trial judge subsequently adjourned the matter until June 22, 2026, for continuation of trial, following a request by counsel to the defendant to provide documents that were not available in court.
