The Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikeja has discharged and acquitted a businessman, Percy Abah, who was charged with allegedly retaining about ₦99.05m traced to fraudulent transactions involving First City Monument Bank, holding that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission failed to prove that he knew the money was proceeds of crime.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-IDRI-Masterclass.png")
Justice Ismail Ijelu, who delivered the judgment on October 20, 2026, in Suit No. ID/27872C/2026, held that although the transactions surrounding the funds were suspicious, the evidence did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that Abah knowingly retained the proceeds on behalf of a person involved in criminal conduct.
In the certified true copy of the judgment obtained by The PUNCH, the judge said the prosecution had established that the money entered Abah’s FCMB account and that substantial portions were subsequently transferred to other accounts, but failed to prove the essential ingredients of the offence.
“The prosecution has established receipt, control and suspicious movement of the funds. It has not established beyond reasonable doubt the Defendant’s knowledge of their criminal origin or their retention on behalf of a criminal principal,” the judge held.
Abah, who trades under the name Percy Sea Integrated Concept, was charged with retaining proceeds of criminal conduct contrary to Section 17(a) and punishable under Section 17(b) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act, 2004.
He was arraigned on March 30, 2026, and pleaded not guilty.
The case arose from allegations that about ₦99.05m, forming part of ₦3bn allegedly fraudulently removed from accounts domiciled with FCMB, was paid into his account in December 2025.
The prosecution called two EFCC investigators, who testified about the movement of the funds and tendered documentary evidence, including bank statements and Abah’s statements to investigators.
The court heard that substantial sums were transferred from Abah’s account to other accounts, including ₦40m to Muhibbaty Multisynergy and ₦1m to an account associated with one Adamu Ado.
Other transfers included ₦23m and ₦25m to accounts associated with other entities, while about ₦10.027m remained in his FCMB account.
During the trial, the EFCC investigators said the unusual inflow, rapid transfers, absence of a formal sales agreement and lack of precise delivery addresses raised questions about the defendant’s explanation.
While testifying in his defence, Abah, who was led in evidence by his lawyer, Victor Emeruwa, with D. Achioso, maintained that the money was connected with a rice supply transaction.
He told the court that he had been involved in rice production and sales since 2014 and operated a rice mill in Ganaja, Lokoja, Kogi State.
According to him, Ado had ordered 644 bags of rice at ₦90,100 per bag, comprising 300 bags for Abuja and 344 bags for Port Harcourt, valued at roughly ₦58m.
He said that after about ₦99.05m was paid into his account, Ado informed him that the amount exceeded the agreed purchase price and instructed him to transfer the excess ₦41m to nominated accounts.
Abah testified that he moved the remaining funds into his other business accounts to purchase rice directly from farmers.
He denied knowing that the money was connected with fraud, adding that the rice was not supplied because FCMB subsequently restricted his account around December 27–28, 2025.
While evaluating the evidence, Justice Ijelu noted that the defendant’s explanation was not raised for the first time during the trial, as one of the EFCC witnesses confirmed that he had given substantially the same account during the investigation.
The judge also highlighted evidence given by the second prosecution witness under cross-examination.
The witness confirmed that the investigation revealed that Abah received the money for business and that nothing discovered during the investigation showed that the funds were not intended for the supply of rice.
She also confirmed that the investigation disclosed nothing contrary to his explanation for transferring money between his accounts.
Justice Ijelu said the evidence did not conclusively establish whether the purported rice transaction was fictitious, noting that the prosecution witnesses gave inconsistent accounts on the issue.
The judge further observed that one investigator admitted that neither he nor members of his team visited the alleged rice mill, while another testified that operatives from the EFCC’s Abuja zonal office visited the address but did not find a mill.
He said no member of the team that allegedly visited the address testified, and no independent report of the visit was identified in the evidence.
The judge added that the restriction placed on Abah’s account before his arrest was relevant to the claim that he deliberately failed to supply the rice.
“Non-delivery does not, without more, establish that the defendant never intended to supply rice,” he held.
On the central question of whether Abah knew the funds were proceeds of crime, the judge said the prosecution failed to establish the required knowledge.
Justice Ijelu noted that there was no evidence connecting the defendant directly with the persons who perpetrated the original fraud or showing that he participated in the alleged unauthorised access to FCMB’s system.
He also distinguished between knowing that money was expected and knowing that it had been obtained illegally.
“Knowledge that a payment is expected is not the same as knowledge that the payment represents proceeds of crime,” the judge said.
The court further held that the prosecution failed to establish sufficiently clearly that Abah retained the funds on behalf of a person whose criminal conduct produced them, as required under Section 17(a) of the EFCC Act.
“The Prosecution has established receipt, control and suspicious movement of the funds. It has not established beyond reasonable doubt the defendant’s knowledge of their criminal origin or their retention on behalf of a criminal principal,” the judge held.
Justice Ijelu acknowledged that the transaction was unusual, given the size of the inflow, the rapid transfers and the absence of adequate documentation.
However, he said the circumstances did not eliminate the reasonable possibility that Abah received the money in connection with a purported commercial transaction without knowing its criminal origin.
“The defendant bears no burden of proving the latter explanation. It is sufficient that a reasonable inference consistent with innocence remains upon the evidence,” the judge held.
Citing the Supreme Court decision in Onwuta v. State of Lagos (2022) LPELR-57962(SC), the judge reiterated that circumstantial evidence relied upon for conviction must be compelling and incompatible with innocence.
“Suspicion, however strong, cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt,” he said.
Justice Ijelu consequently resolved the sole issue for determination in favour of the defendant.
“The Prosecution having failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt all the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 17(a) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act, 2004, I find the defendant, Percy Abah, not guilty,” the judge held.
He accordingly discharged and acquitted Abah.
“This shall be the judgment of the court,” the judge said.
E.S. Okongwu appeared for the prosecution, while Victor E. Emeruwa, with D. Achioso, represented the defendant.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
