An Abuja Federal High Court has denied bail to three Crypto Bridge Exchange (CBEX) promoters currently detained in connection with an alleged $1 billion fraud.
The six suspects include Adefowora Abiodun, Adefowora Oluwanisola, Emmanuel Uko, and Seyi Oloyede.
Others are Avwerosuo Otorudo and Chukwuebuka Ehirim as the 1st to 6th defendants, respectively.
On Monday, Justice Emeka Nwite ruled that the evidence against the defendants was strong, based on the affidavits presented by both parties.
Justice Nwite also noted that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had previously secured a valid remand order for the defendants due to the nature of the case.
The judge observed that while no formal charges had been filed against the CBEX promoters at the time of their bail application, charges have since been filed and are awaiting assignment to a specific court or judge.
“In view of the foregoing and taking cognizance of the nature of the case and, particularly, a charge that has been filed against applicants, I am of the view and I so hold that the interest of justice will be met by taking this application to the court where the charge is pending for the court to take the arraignment of the applicants and hear the bail application simultaneously.
“Hence, the application is refused,” the judge ruled.
Persecondnews recalls that Nwite had on June 11, fixed today for the ruling after counsel for the EFCC, Fadila Yusuf, and the defence lawyers adopted their processes and argued their case for and against the application.
On April 24, the judge had given the EFCC the go-ahead to arrest and detain six operators of CBEX over their involvement in the fraud.
The judge, who gave the order after the EFCC’s lawyer, Yusuf, moved an ex-parte motion to the effect, said the detention would be pending the conclusion of investigation of the alleged offences and possible prosecution.
In the motion ex parte dated and filed April 23 by Yusuf, the anti-graft agency gave four grounds for its application.
She said the EFCC has a statutory duty of prevention and detection of financial crimes through investigation.
Yusuf said that “the defendants are at large, and a warrant of arrest is required to arrest the defendants for proper investigation and prosecution of this case.”
Adefowora Abiodun (1st defendant), Avwerosuo Otorudo (5th defendant) and Chukwuebuka Ehirim (6th defendant) had been in the EFCC’s custody for investigation.
Upon the resumed hearing on the last adjourned date, Babatunde Busari, who appeared for Abiodun, and Justice Otorudo, who represented Otorudo and Ehirim, informed the court that they had filed bail applications on their clients’ behalf.
In their motion on notice brought pursuant to Section 35(1)(4) and Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and Section 158, 162 and 165 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, the lawyers sought one order.
They sought an order of the court varying its earlier order made on April 24, which granted the EFCC leave to arrest and detain the applicants by granting bail pending the conclusion of the investigations and possible arraignment and trial.
After the arguments of the defence lawyers, the EFCC counsel, Yusuf, vehemently opposed their bail request.
She told the court that their application had been overtaken by events, as a charge had already been filed against them.
The lawyer argued that all the defendants in the matter are being charged for the offence of obtaining over N1 billion dollars, more than some states’ budgets in Nigeria.
“It is in fact more than a budget of about 10 states joined together, my Lord,” she said.
She said the commission was still receiving petitions from victims of the alleged fraud.
The lawyer said though granting bail is at the discretion of the court, this should be done judiciously and judicially, urging the court to dismiss the same.
In the ruling on Monday, Justice Nwite also dismissed the defence argument that Abiodun, who is the 1st defendant, is indisposed and hence needs medical attention.
The judge held that the defence had not shown in their affidavit evidence that the EFCC cannot take the defendants to a hospital for the specialist attention.
The EFCC, in the affidavit in support of the motion ex parte filed against the defendants, said sometime in April 2025, it received intel regarding an alleged investment scheme fraud against the defendants.
It alleged that the defendants and their company, ST Technologies International Limited, using another company, Crypto Bridge Exchange (CBEX), perpetrated the alleged fraud, and the case was received and assigned to its Cybercrimes Section for investigation.
The agency said the preliminary investigation into the intel revealed the following:
“That Messrs Adefowora Abiodun Olanipekun, Adefowora Oluwanisola, Emmanuel Uko and Seyi Oloyede, using their company ST Technologies International Limited, promoted another company, Crypto Bridge Exchange (CBEX), by making adverts and lured unsuspecting members of the public to invest in cryptocurrencies on the CBEX investment platform.”
The EFCC averred that the defendants promised an unrealistic return on investment of up to 100%.
“That the victims were made to convert their digital assets into a stablecoin, USDT, for onwards deposit into the suspect’s crypto wallet. That the victims were initially given full access to the platform to monitor their investment.
“Following deposits valued at over 1 billion dollars by the victims, the CBEX investment platform became inaccessible to them, and they could no longer withdraw from the investment made. That the victims later discovered that the said scheme is a scam.
“That during the course of investigation, it was discovered that the said ST Technologies International Limited, though registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), was not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for investment purposes.
“That it was also discovered during the investigation that the defendants had moved out of their last known address in Lagos and Ogun States.”
The anti-graft agency said that a warrant of arrest was required to place the defendants on a red watch list so that they could be traced and arrested to answer to the case against them.
According to the commission, investigation into the allegation against the defendants revealed a prima facie case of investment scam.
It said it would be in the interest of justice to grant the application.
Leave a comment