Justice Musa Kakaki of a Federal High Court, Lagos, has refused a motion for bail, filed by a businesswoman, Amina Momoh-Orimoloye, who is being detained by the Economic and Financial Crimes Investigation (EFCC), over alleged N500 million fraud.
Amina Momoh-Orimoloye is the Coordinator of Economic Empowerment of Women and Youth in Livestock Agriculture (EEWYLA) and founder of Oriyon International Limited.
Justice Kakaki refused her bail application, while delivering ruling in the suit numbered FHC/L/1741/2025, filed against the EFCC.
The applicant, who is also a United Kingdom (UK) citizen, through her lawyer, Mrs. Abimbola Akeredolu (SAN), had filed the motion pursuant to Sections 6, (6) (b), 35(4), 36(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended); Section 32 (1), (2) and (3) of Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015); and under the court’s inherent jurisdiction.
She specifically asked for the followings: “an order compelling the respondent (EFCC) to produce the applicant in Court to enable this Honourable Court inquire into the circumstances constituting the grounds of her detention since August 5, 2025 by officers of the respondent and where it deems fit admit the Applicant to bail.
“An order admitting her to bail pending the conclusion of investigation (if any) or pending when the EFCC will prefer a criminal charge (if any) against her.
“An order of the honourable court directing and mandating the Respondent (EFCC) to immediately release her within 24 hours, from custody in line with the terms of bail granted to her by this Honourable Court. And such further order or orders, as the honourable court may deem fit to make in the circumstances”.
She supported the application with an affidavit of 13 paragraphs deposed to by one Johab Agbo, a lawyer in the law firm of Banwo & Ighodalo, Counsel to the applicant.
She also supported the application with a written address.
She equally listed 10 grounds for court to considered in granting her application.
Some of the deponent’s averments read: “Since the applicant’s arrest by officers of the Respondent on August 5, 2025, the respondent has to date, continued to detain the Applicant against her fundamental right without any criminal charge preferred against her.
“On the same August 5, 2025 the applicant was presented with bail conditions containing onerous, unfair and unreasonable conditions. And that by the bail conditions, the Applicant was required to present 2 (two) sureties who should be Directors in either the Federal or State Civil Service and also holders of Certificates of Occupancy in respect of properties situated in Lagos State.
“In a bid to fulfil and comply with the bail conditions, the applicant presented Deputy Registrars of Higher Institutions of Learning in Nigeria who are equivalent to Directors in the Federal and State Civil service, but the Respondent refused to verify and/or accept the Deputy Registrars as sureties on the ground that they are not on the level of a Director.
“The Applicant has been subjected to daily mental draining interrogation by the Respondent on her private life and career, which interrogation has no correlation, relevance and/or basis with the subject of the Respondent’s investigation.
“The Applicant has been mocked, harassed, threatened and intimidated on countless occasions by officials of the Respondent who are not even involved in the purported investigation by the Special Duty Committee Unit of the Respondent.
“Several efforts have been made by the Applicant’s relatives and lawyers to secure her release on administrative bail. However, the Respondent has deliberately shut the door of the administrative bail for the Applicant and has continued to frustrate all efforts to secure the Applicant’s release from custody.
“Despite the clear provisions of law which mandates law enforcement agencies to Charge an accused person within 24 (twenty-four) hours of arrest or 48 (forty-eight) hours as the case may be, the Respondent has in flagrant disregard of the law continued to detain the applicant without preferring any charge against her before a court of competent jurisdiction.
“The Respondent is mandated under section 35(4) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) to infraction by the Applicant, bring the Applicant before a court of competent jurisdiction for arraignment within a maximum period of 48 (forty-eight) hours.
“Since her arrest, the Applicant has been held in deplorable conditions without or adequate access to proper food, essential amenities, or medical care, and her health condition has been in a poor state.
“The deteriorating medical condition of the Applicant, she promptly brought to the attention of the Respondent’s officers with a passionate appeal to release the Applicant on bail to enable her access proper medical care or at least prefer criminal charge against her in a court of competent jurisdiction in the interest of justice,
“Unfortunately, all efforts to secure the release of the Applicant on bail has been abortive as the respondent has adamantly and deliberately refused to grant the Applicant administrative bail and refused to prefer any criminal charge against her.”
But the EFCC in a 29 paragraphs counter-affidavit to the application deposed to by one of its investigators, John Justice, and moved by Barrister Suleiman I. Suleiman, urged the court to dismiss the applicant’s motion for lacking in merit.
Parts of the EFCC’s aveerments in the counter-affidavit reads: “That in the course of the discharge of its statutory function, the Respondent received a petition from Nyam M. Arum & Co., on behalf of Mr. Salihu Mohammed, alleging conspiracy and misappropriation of funds. Copy of the said petition is herewith attached and marked Exhibit EFCC 01.
“That the petitioner alleged he was engaged by one of his customers on 31st July, 2025 for a foreign exchange transaction to the tune of N1, 663, 000, 000
“That preliminary investigation revealed that Mr. Muhammed, upon receipt of the sum of N1,163,000,000 on behalf of the petitioner conspired with one Auwal Ali and the Applicant, together with others at large to convert the balance sum of N500,000,000 belonging to the petitioner.
“That the Respondent was arrested on the 5 August, 2025 and upon her arrest and confrontation with the allegation, she volunteered her extrajudicial statement under words of caution, was served with bail condition and profiled accordingly.
“That upon granting the applicant bail, in line with the rule of law, the applicant obtained a valid remand warrant to enable it have the authority to keep the Applicant in its custody pending when she gets reliable sureties to fulfill conditions of her administrative bail.
“That the Applicant’s affidavit in support of originating motion, administrative bail condition granted the Applicant is the normal bail condition granted to suspects under investigation and there was no application by the Applicant for variation of those terms seeing that she could not fulfill same.
