Lagos High Court: Percy Abah Acquitted of N99m Fraud Charges

• Businessman Percy Abah was acquitted by the Lagos State High Court, Ikeja, of charges related to retaining N99.05 million from alleged fraudulent transactions.
• Justice Ismail Ijelu ruled that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission failed to prove Abah knowingly retained proceeds of criminal conduct.
• The court acknowledged suspicious financial movements but found insufficient evidence to establish Abah's awareness of the funds' illicit origin.
• Abah maintained the funds were for a rice supply deal, with excess amounts transferred at the instruction of a client.
• The judgment emphasized the prosecution's failure to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that Abah possessed the requisite knowledge of the money's criminal source.

The court ultimately determined that while the financial movements appeared suspicious, the prosecution did not meet the high bar of proving beyond reasonable doubt that Abah possessed knowledge of the funds' criminal origin or that he retained them on behalf of a criminal principal.

A businessman, Percy Abah, has been discharged and acquitted by the Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikeja, following charges that he retained approximately N99.05 million linked to fraudulent transactions. The court, presided over by Justice Ismail Ijelu, concluded that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) failed to demonstrate that Abah was aware the funds constituted proceeds of criminal activity.

Justice Ijelu delivered the judgment on October 20, 2026, in Suit No. ID/27872C/2026, finding that despite the suspicious nature of the financial movements, the evidence presented did not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Abah knowingly held these funds on behalf of an individual involved in criminal conduct. This ruling underscores the stringent burden of proof required from the prosecution in such cases, particularly concerning the defendant's knowledge of the illicit origin of funds.

Abah, who operates under the business name Percy Sea Integrated Concept, was formally charged on March 30, 2026, with retaining proceeds of criminal conduct, an offense contrary to Section 17(a) and punishable under Section 17(b) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act, 2004. He entered a plea of not guilty. The case stemmed from allegations that the N99.05 million deposited into his First City Monument Bank (FCMB) account in December 2025 was part of a larger N3 billion fraudulently siphoned from other accounts held at the same bank.

During the trial, the prosecution presented two EFCC investigators who testified regarding the flow of the funds and submitted documentary evidence, including bank statements and Abah’s own statements to investigators. The EFCC highlighted several red flags, such as the unusual inflow of funds, rapid subsequent transfers, the absence of a formal sales agreement, and a lack of precise delivery addresses, which they argued cast doubt on Abah's explanations. Specific transfers included N40 million to Muhibbaty Multisynergy, N1 million to an account linked to Adamu Ado, and additional sums of N23 million and N25 million to other entities, with approximately N10.027 million remaining in his FCMB account.

In his defense, led by his legal counsel Victor Emeruwa and D. Achioso, Abah asserted that the funds were related to a legitimate rice supply transaction. He informed the court that he had been actively involved in rice production and sales since 2014, operating a rice mill in Ganaja, Lokoja, Kogi State. Abah testified that a client named Adamu Ado had placed an order for 644 bags of rice, priced at N90,100 per bag, totaling approximately N58 million, intended for delivery to Abuja and Port Harcourt.

Abah explained that after the N99.05 million was credited to his account, Ado informed him that the amount exceeded the agreed purchase price and instructed him to transfer the surplus N41 million to specified accounts. He further stated that he moved the remaining funds into his other business accounts with the intention of purchasing rice directly from farmers. Abah vehemently denied any knowledge that the money was connected to fraudulent activities, adding that the rice supply could not be completed because FCMB subsequently restricted his account around December 27–28, 2025.

In his evaluation of the evidence, Justice Ijelu observed that Abah's explanation was not a new development introduced solely during the trial. The judge noted that one of the EFCC witnesses had corroborated that Abah provided substantially the same account of events during the initial investigation. Furthermore, the second prosecution witness also provided evidence under cross-examination that supported the consistency of Abah's narrative.

The court ultimately determined that while the financial movements appeared suspicious, the prosecution did not meet the high bar of proving beyond reasonable doubt that Abah possessed knowledge of the funds' criminal origin or that he retained them on behalf of a criminal principal. The judgment highlighted that the prosecution successfully established the receipt, control, and suspicious movement of the funds, but critically failed to prove the essential ingredient of the defendant's awareness of their criminal source.

This judgment underscores the high burden of proof on the prosecution to establish *mens rea* (knowledge of criminal origin) in cases of retaining proceeds of criminal conduct under the EFCC Act. Lawyers defending clients in similar financial crime cases can leverage this precedent to challenge the prosecution's evidence regarding the defendant's knowledge, even when transactions appear suspicious, emphasizing that suspicion alone is insufficient for conviction.

Source: Original reporting via The PUNCH