www.newstower.ng

EFCC arraigns former Access Bank’s head of operations over alleged $510,000 customer fund diversion

EFCC arraigns former Access Bank’s head of operations over alleged 0,000 customer fund diversion

 

 

The Enugu Zonal Directorate of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, on Thursday, November 13, 2025, brought one Obinna Nwaobi, a former Head of Operations at Access Bank Nigeria Plc, before Justice F. O. Giwa-Ogunbanjo of the Federal High Court in Independence Layout, Enugu.

 

In a statement, the anti-graft agency confirmed that Nwaobi is facing a nine-count charge linked to alleged forgery and the criminal diversion of $510,000 (Five Hundred and Ten Thousand United States Dollars) said to belong to a customer of the bank.

One of the charges, count seven, states: “That you, Obinna Nwaobi while being (Head of Operations) of Access Bank Nigeria Plc, Enugu branch on or about the 8th day of August, 2024 in Enugu State, within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, induced Access Bank Nigeria Plc to transfer a total sum of Five Hundred and Ten Thousand United States Dollars ($510, 000. 00) from LANTERN GATE NIGERIA LIMITED Access Bank Account number 0761770127 under the false pretence that Lantern Gate Nigeria Limited gave her consent and mandate for the said transfer which pretence you knew to be false and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 1 (b) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006 and punishable under Section 1 (3) of the same Act”.

Count eight further reads: “That you, Obinna Nwaobi while being (Head of Operations) of Access Bank Plc, Enugu branch on or about the eight day of August, 2024 in Enugu State, within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, knowingly forged a document to Wit: “Access Bank Domestic Fund Transfer Form “D”, dated 28th August 2024, knowing same to be false and with intent that it may be acted upon as genuine to the prejudice of Access Bank Plc and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 1 (2) (a) of the Miscellaneous Offences Act 2004 and punishable under Section 1 (2) of the same Act”.

 

After the charges were read, the defendant entered a plea of “not guilty”. His lawyer, F. C. Obinna, informed the court of a pending bail application dated October 24, 2025, supported by an eight-paragraph affidavit. He urged the judge to grant his client bail.

However, EFCC counsel, Assistant Commander of the EFCC, ACE II Mainforce Adaka Ekwu, strongly contested the application, relying on an 11-paragraph counter affidavit filed on November 12, 2025. The prosecution argued that the weight of evidence in its possession could motivate the defendant to flee, saying “the quality of evidence we have in our proof of evidence might put fear in him and he might want to abscond”.

 

The court, after considering submissions from both sides, admitted the defendant to bail in the sum of N250 million (Two Hundred and Fifty Million Naira), with three sureties in the same amount. Two sureties must own landed property in Enugu State and submit their ownership documents to the court.

 

“The third surety shall be a relative of the defendant, who shall deposit evidence of tax payment for three years. The defendant and the sureties shall deposit two passports each to the court and the defendant shall deposit his international passport and National Identification Number to the court until the determination of this case,” the judge ruled.

 

The matter was adjourned to March 10, 11, and 12, 2026 for trial, while the defendant was remanded in the custody of the Nigeria Correctional Service in Enugu.

 

The case traces back to September 11, 2024, when Access Bank Plc petitioned the EFCC, reporting unauthorized transfers from a customer’s account.

 

The bank alleged that $510,000 belonging to Lantern Gate Nigeria Limited was moved into six accounts on the authorization of Nwaobi—then its Head of Operations—without the customer’s approval.

 

“This breach, coupled with the customer’s representatives’ explicit statement of not issuing the instruction for the transfer of the specified amounts, raises concerns and underscores the need for further investigation,” the petitioner stated.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *