Alleged $ 1 billion fraud: court for ruling on cbex detained operators …

On Wednesday, the Federal Court of Abuja suspended the demand for deposit presented by three promoters of Crypto Bridge Exchange (CBEX) in the alleged fraud of over one billion dollars until June 30 for the sentence.

Judge Emeka Nwite set the date after the consultant for the Commission for Economic and Financial Crimes (EFCC), Fadila Yusuf and the defense lawyers have adopted their processes and supported their case in favor and against the question.

The news agency of Nigeria (Nan) reports that judge Nwite had, on April 24, gave Fcc the green light to arrest and retain six cbex operators for their involvement in the fraud

The judge, who gave the order after the AFCC lawyer, Yusuf, moved a motion ex-Parte in effect, said that detention would be awaited the conclusion of the investigations on the alleged crimes and possible judicial proceedings.

The six suspicions include Adefowora Inhabitun Olanipekun, Adefowora Oluwanisola, Emmanuel Uko and Seyi Oloyede.

Others are Avwerosuo otorudo and chukwuebuka hehirim from 1st to 6th accused respectively.

In the former part date dated and presented on April 23 by Yusuf, the anti-Innesto agency gave four reasons for its question.

He said the EFCC has a statutory duty of prevention and detection of financial crimes through investigations.

Yusuf said that “the defendants are free and a stopping mandate is held to arrest the defendants for a correct investigation and pursuit against this case”.

Nan reports that Adefowora Inhabitun (1st accused), Avwerosuo Otourdo (5th accused) and Chukwuebuka Ehirim (sixth accused) had been in custody of the Fcc on investigations.

After taking up hearing on Wednesday, Babaunde Busari, who appeared for Inhabitun, and the judge Otoulo, who represented Otoulo and Ehirim, informed the Court of having submitted a deposit applications on behalf of their customers.

“We have a suspended question dated 20 May 2025 and we presented the same date. We are ready to proceed my Lord,” said Busari.

Otouldo also told the Court that he had submitted a deposit application on behalf of the 5th and 6th accused (Otoulo and Heyrim) dated 8 May, but filed on May 9.

Busari said that although they received the sworn declaration of the FCC this morning, they were ready to proceed.

“We will reply to the bank entrusting on my Lord’s points of law,” he said.

Busari said that the deposit application was submitted pursuant to sections 34, 35, 36, 41 and 46 of the Constitution (as amended) and the sections 159, 259, 296 and 298 of the administration of the Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.

He said that the question sought an order that grants the bail of inhabuen to liberal conditions from the custody of the FCC pending the preferential of the accusation if present against him.

He said he also sought a provisional order that forced the EFCC to produce it before the Court for the purposes of the Court who granted him the deposit from the custody of the Commission as guaranteed by the relevant sections of the law.

Busari, while giving the reason for the application, declared the court on April 24, issued a arrest warrant and a postponement order against Inhabitun and other people in relation to the CBEX.

The lawyer, however, said that before April 24, inhabitants, through his lawyer, contacted the EFCC on April 22 that he was ready to surrender for the investigation and that on April 28 he delivered himself for the investigations.

He said that inhaboun, that he suffered from a serious disorder, had since been in custody of the anti-Innesto agency without bailing since April 28, more than the law prescribed 14 days.

He said that the EFCC clung to the facts that the Court’s Order has not prescribed time and could retain inhaboun for what they wanted in violation of his right.

Furthermore, he claimed that he had not been accused against him for any infringement of the law in any competent court.

Busari said that although the accusation served with a sworn declaration in the morning, he based his discussion on two points of law.

The lawyer argued that throughout the counter entrusted, there was no average that controversial the entrance of inhabitants in support of the demand for deposit, citing two preceding cases in support of his presentation.

Once again he argued that although the totality of the Fuccc counterattack was hinged on the topic that Inhabitun could probably skip the deposit, he recalled that inhaboun voluntarily surrendered to the commission.

In addition, he claimed that the country’s legal system recognizes the presumption of a suspicion as innocent until he demonstrates guilty and that the assumption that could probably jump the deposit should not be a basis for the denial of the deposit.

He said that his detention for about 40 days contradicts sections 295 and 296 of ACJA, which entered into 14 days for an order of postponement and another 14 -day extension.

The lawyer urged the court to grant their prayers.

For his part, consultant of the 5th and 6th defendant, Otouldo also discussed in the same vein.

He said that his question sought an order that varied the previous order that grants EFCC leave to arrest and retain its customers waiting for the investigations or a possible retreat/process.

The lawyer, who gave six reasons, said that the 5th and 6th defendants voluntarily surrendered from April 25 and that until now they were still in custody without being admitted to the deposit.

He said that if granted the deposit, applicants are arranged and ready to be available for further investigations and attend the court every time it is necessary.

“We have four entrusted paragraph in support. We also have two exhibitions to urge my Lord to grant the question

“By way of adumbration, we claim that my Lord at this point will evaluate if there are material facts to show if the applicants will be available for the process,” he said.

Otouludo did not agree with the Arkuscle of the FCC on the severity of the accusation towards its customers.

“According to the accusation attached as an exhibition, in its entirety, we do not raise any serious crime that will discourage the applicants not to be granted in deposit.”

He argued that the crimes they are accused of are the climbing ones.

Therefore, he asked the Court to use his discretion in their favor.

By responding, Yusuf vehemently opposed the deposit of their question.

He said in response to the Application of inhaboun, a sworn declaration of five paragraphs with three exhibitions was presented.

The AFCC lawyer observed that inhaboun, in his prayer, sought a deposit pending the preference of an accusation against him.

“Our submission is that this prayer has been overcome by the event as an accusation has already been presented before this honorable court and we urge you to hold back like this,” he said.

He also urged the Court to defeat the 5th and 6th accused request for the deposit.

According to Yusuf, all the defendants in this matter are accused of offense to obtain over n1 billion dollars, more than the budgets of some states in Nigeria.

“In fact it is more than a budget of about 10 states united to my Lord,” he said.

He said the commission was still receiving petitions from the victims of the alleged fraud.

The lawyer said that although granting the deposit is at the discretion of the court, this should be done with judgment and judicial.

“We urge my Lord not to grant this question,” he concluded.

Nan reports that the EFCC, in the sworn declaration in support of the ex-Parte motion, sometimes declared in April 2025, received an INTEL that worried about an alleged fraud of the investment regime against the defendants.

He said 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 IT criminal section for investigation.

The agency said that the preliminary investigation on the Intel revealed the following:

“That Mr. Adefora Inhabitun Olanipekun, Adafowora Oluwanisola, Emmanuel Uko and Seyi Oloyede, using their company St Technologies International Limited, promoted another Crypto Bridge Exchange (CBEX) by advertising and attracted the unexpected members suspicious of public members to invest currencies of currencies encryption on the CBEX investment platform. “

The EFCC said that the defendants promised an unrealistic return to investments up to 100%.

“That the victims were made to convert their digital resources into a stable USDT coin for a subsequent deposit in the suspected crypto wallet.

“That the victims initially had full access to the platform to monitor their investment.

“That by following the deposits worth over $ 1 billion from the victims, the CBEX investment platform has become inaccessible to them and could no longer retire from the investments made.

“That the victims subsequently discovered that the aforementioned scheme is a scam.

“That during the course of the investigations, it was discovered that the said ST Technologies International Limited, although recorded at the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), was not recorded at the Security and Exchange Commission (sec) for investment purposes.

“That was also discovered during the investigations that the defendants had moved from their last address known to the states of Lagos and Ogun”.

The Anti-Innesto Agency said that a stopping mandate was required to place the defendants on the list of brigade brigade so that they could be traced and arrested to respond to the case against them.

According to the Commission, the investigations on the accusation against the defendants revealed a first case of investment fraud.

He said it would be in the interest of justice to grant the question. (Nan)

Related