• Court Judgement
• Oak Group

COURT TO RULE ON ADMISSION OF CEO’S STATEMENT IN N152 MILLION FRAUD CASE

• 

  Nicolas Adekeye / 3 weeks
• 0
• 2 min read

Justice Musa Kakaki of the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos, has set April 15, 2025, for ruling on the admissibility of the written statement of Mr. Olukayode Olusanya, Chief Executive Officer of Oak Homes Limited, who is facing a four-count charge of conspiracy, threat to life, obtaining money under false pretense, and stealing. Olusanya and his company, Oaks Homes Limited, are accused of defrauding a Nigerian-American engineer, Anthony Ugbebor, of N152 million. The police prosecutor alleged that Olusanya conspired with Lynda Umeh, the company’s head of sales and marketing, who is currently at large, to deceive Engineer Ugbebor into paying N152m for two three-bedroom apartments at the Oak Residence, Victoria Island, Lagos, with a promise to hand over possession by February 28, 2019. However, they failed to deliver the property. During the hearing on February 11, 2025, the prosecution witness, Egho Amiebelomo, an Assistant Superintendent of Police, ASP, told the court that the accused refused to honour police invitation, claiming the Zone 2 Police Command, Onikan, Lagos, was “too small” for him. He was eventually arrested at his office and later released on bail but absconded for months before being rearrested and brought to court. The prosecution counsel sought to tender two documents – the petition against Olusanya and his written statement – as exhibits. However, Olusanya’s counsel, Agboola Adeleke, SAN, objected, arguing that the statement was not taken in the presence of a lawyer or video-recorded, as required under Section 9 of the Administration of Criminal Justice (ACJ) Act. The prosecution counsel countered that the defence’s objection was misplaced, citing Section 15 for (4) of the ACJ Act, which allows for statements to be recorded with or without video evidence. He also argued that the petition was a public document and, therefore, admissible in court. “The petition originated from a private citizen but was officially received and acted upon by the AIG, with official stamps and directives. That makes it a public document, admissible under the law,” the prosecution counsel said. “The key question here is whether this document is relevant to the trial of the defendant. Since it is, we urge the court to dismiss the objections raised by the defence and admit the evidence.”