MUSTAPHA AUDU, son of former Governor of Kogi State, on Monday appeared before Justice Abubakar Umar of an Abuja High Court for alleged N18 million scam.
Audu is arraigned by the EFCC alongside his wife, Zahrah Audu and their company, Constructor Guild Ltd. before the court.
They were alleged to have collected N18 million from one Nike Kolawole to acquire a four-bedroom apartment for her at Ruskin Terrace, Katamkpe Extension, Abuja, but failed to do so.
At the resumed hearing of the case, the prosecution witness, Kolawole, being led in evidence by the EFCC Counsel, Mr Samuel Ugwuegulam, told the court that she was introduced to the company by the second accused, Zahra Audu.
“I meet Audu, who was an assistant director of the company and I explained to her that I was looking for house.
“ And she told me that she has a company, which is into property development in Lagos,’’ Kolawole said.
She said that the accused took her to the first accused, who is the director of the company, adding that the accused showed her pictures of some houses, which they claimed to have built in Lagos.
She also said that the accused told her that they were planning to build same structures in Abuja, which she indicated interest.
She said that the accused took her to one plot of land in Idu-Sabo village, Abuja, where they claimed to have proposed a mass housing estate.
“And we agreed that I will pay in instalments. I paid N3 million first as commitment fee.
“ I paid the first instalment of N10 million for the 4-bedroom apartment and another N5 million instalment. The accused told me that they will use the N18 million to build the house to lintel level and leave the rest for me to complete,’’ she said.
Mr Okechukwu Ajunwa, Counsel to the accused, however, prayed the court for a short adjournment to enable him prepare for cross examination of the prosecution witness.
“My lord, there are some issues we want to raise and compile in our cross examination. So, we need time prepare,’’ he said.
The prosecution counsel, however, opposed the oral application, saying that the prosecution witness was a civil servant and had a busy schedule.
Justice Umar, however, said that there must be a serious reason for adjournment because the defence counsel had earlier asked for a stand down of the case, which the court granted.
After an exhaustive argument on the application for adjournment, Umar adjourned the case to May 21 and 22 for cross examination of the prosecution witness.