Court Rejects Fresh Bail Plea by Fred Ajudua in $1m Fraud Trial

Wale Igbintade

Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, has declined a fresh bail application filed by alleged serial fraud suspect, Fred Ajudua, citing a pending appeal before the Supreme Court.

At yesterday’s proceedings, Ajudua appeared in court accompanied by medical personnel from the Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH), following efforts by his counsel, Olalekan Ojo, (SAN) to ensure his presence despite his deteriorating health condition.

Ojo informed the court that: “On July 23, 2025, I gave an undertaking that I would ensure the defendant’s presence today with the assistance of medical personnel from LUTH. I am aware of a letter from the hospital indicating it is not standard practice to release patients undergoing special treatment for court appearances, but they made an exception today.”

He added that the defence was ready to proceed with trial, though he emphasised that only a living defendant can face trial. However, before the trial resumed, Ojo urged the court to hear Ajudua’s fresh bail application dated and filed on July 22, 2025, supported by a 12-paragraph affidavit and a written address.

He noted that the prosecution’s counter-affidavit was only served on them the previous day, July 29.

Prosecution counsel, S.H. Atteh, opposed the application, submitting a seven-paragraph counter-affidavit with attached exhibits, including a Supreme Court judgment.

He argued that the application should be directed to the Supreme Court rather than the trial court.  He therefore urged the court to refuse the application.

In her ruling, Justice Dada held: “In view of the applications filed at the Supreme Court, I am constrained to take any decision on the instant bail application, as highlighted by the defence counsel. I will abide by the decision of the Supreme Court.”

The matter was thereafter adjourned to October 10, October 31, and November 20, 2025, for continuation of trial.

Earlier during trial, the prosecution called its third witness, Atanda Emmanuel, an operative of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

He testified that the case was initially handled by the Nigeria Police before being transferred to the EFCC in 2005.

According to him, in 2011, he was directed by his team leader to review the case file, which included correspondence from the Nigeria Police to the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), and the Nigerian Chamber of Commerce.

These documents were allegedly tied to fraudulent claims made by Ajudua. The EFCC conducted further investigations, including forensic analysis in 2013.

Emmanuel stated that the Commission received responses from the CBN, NNPC, and its forensic laboratory in Abuja.

However, defence counsel, Ojo, objected to the admissibility of several documents tendered through the witness, arguing they were photocopies and lacked proper certification.

He also contended that Emmanuel, not being the author of the forensic report, could not tender it without a proper foundation proving the original author was either unavailable or deceased.

In a ruling, the court admitted two documents but rejected two others, including the forensic analysis and certain CBN documents, for failing to meet evidentiary standards.

Fred Ajudua is standing trial for allegedly defrauding a Palestinian businessman, Zad Abu Zalaf, of $1,043,000 under false pretenses.

The case, which began in 2005 before Justice M.O. Obadina of the Lagos State High Court, has faced numerous delays due to legal tactics by the defence.

It was later reassigned to Justices J.E. Oyefeso and eventually to Justice Dada, before whom Ajudua was re-arraigned on June 4, 2018.

Justice Dada had initially denied him bail, prompting an appeal to the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal, which granted bail on September 10, 2018. Dissatisfied with the appellate court’s ruling, the EFCC appealed to the Supreme Court.

The EFCC also challenged the appellate court’s decision to reassign the case to another judge to start afresh (de novo).  The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the EFCC on both counts and directed Justice Dada to continue the trial.