EFCC ARRAIGNS MAN FOR ALLEGED STEALING IN ENUGU. (PHOTO). #PRESS RELEASE

 EFCC Arraigns Man for Alleged Stealing  in Enugu

The Enugu Zonal Directorate of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC on Tuesday, September 23, 2025 arraigned one Ani Ugochukwu Augustine before Justice Ngozi Orji of the  Enugu State High Court sitting in Independence Layout, Enugu, for alleged stealing.

He was arraigned on a one-count charge bordering on stealing to the tune of N1, 300,000.00 (One Million, Three Hundred Thousand Naira).

The charge reads: “That you, Ani Ugochukwu Augustine sometime in 2021, in Enugu, Enugu State, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable court, did commit a felony to wit: stealing by fraudulently converting to your personal use, the sum of N1,300,000.00 (One Million, Three Hundred Thousand Naira) being property of Mrs Nsoke Veronica and you whereby committed an offence”.

The offence is contrary to Section 342 and 343 of the Criminal Code Law, Cap 30, the Revised Edition (Laws of Enugu State of Nigeria), 2004 and punishable under Section 353 (f) and (i) of the same Law.

The defendant pleaded “not guilty” when the charge was read to him.

In view of his plea, counsel to the EFCC, Assistant Commander of the EFCC, ACE II Michael Ikechukwu Ani prayed the court for a trial date and for the defendant to be remanded at the Correctional facility.

However,  defence counsel Ngozi Uzoma,  attempted to make an oral application for his client’s bail but Ani  opposed the move  on the ground that “this is a court of record and the proper thing should be done”.

Justice Ngozi Orji thereafter ordered the defence to file a proper application for bail before the court. The matter was thereafter adjourned to October 2, 2025 for hearing of bail application and the defendant was remanded at the Correctional facility.

The defendant was arrested based on claims of a petitioner that alleged that he lured her into believing that he could help her purchase a good second-hand Toyota Sienna car with the said sum. After making the payment, the defendant neither provided the said car nor returned the petitioner’s money to her.