Alleged Fraud: Innoson Boss Absent In Court For Arraignment

Adesola Soyele  
Updated January 17, 2018
Alleged Fraud: Innoson Boss Absent In Court For Arraignment
File photo: Innocent Chukwuma


Chairman of Innoson Nigeria Limited, Innocent Chukwuma, failed to show up at the Lagos High Court sitting in Ikeja on Wednesday for his arraignment on allegations of fraud.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had filed four counts against Mr Chukwuma and his company.

They include conspiracy to obtain property by false pretence, obtaining property by false pretence, stealing and forgery.

The anti-graft agency also joined his brother, Charles Chukwuma, as the third defendant to the charge which was filed before the court on November 30, 2017.

When the matter came up in court today (Wednesday), counsel to the Mr Chukwuma, U. Onwukwe told the court that his clients were absent because they have not been served with a copy of the charge.

He also informed the court that he had filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear the case.

The EFCC, however, insisted that the defendants were evading service.

The presiding judge, Justice Mojisola Dada, then asked the EFCC to serve the lawyer a copy of the charge sheet on behalf of his clients.

Justice Dada adjourned the case till February 9 and directed Onwukwe to produce his client at the next sitting of the court.

In the first count, the defendants were alleged to have conspired between 2009 and 2011 to obtain by false pretence, containers of motorcycle spare parts and raw materials from Mistui OSK Limited, a company based in Apapa, Lagos.

The items listed are said to be the property of Guaranty Trust Bank (GT Bank).

In the second count, the EFCC alleged that the defendants bribed staff of Mistui OSK and Maersk Line Limited to deliver to them, through their clearing agents, containers of motorcycle spare parts, molds of plastic parts, steel structures, as well as raw materials imported into Nigeria from China in the name of GT Bank as the consignee by, pretending they had the authority of the bank to clear the items and took delivery of same.

The offences are said to be contrary to certain provisions of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Offences Act of 2006.