$42.5 Million Rice Scam Case Takes Twist As Judge Withdraws

The defendants — Prem Garg, Devashish Garg, Marcus Wade, Agrico Agbe Limited, and Wilben Trade Limited — are standing trial on a five-count charge bordering on conspiracy, obtaining by false pretence, cheating, and conversion.

When the case was called, none of the defendants appeared in court. Counsel representation included Prince Damola Seriki for the first, second, and fourth defendants, while I.A. Akintaye appeared for the nominal complainant. M.N. Enyi represented Standard Chartered Bank, listed as a third party.

The Federal Government, through the Department of Public Prosecutions of the Federal Ministry of Justice, is prosecuting the case over allegations that the defendants fraudulently obtained foreign exchange from Ecobank Plc under the guise of financing rice importation transactions into Nigeria.

Court records show that in charge FHC/L/CR/51/2022, the defendants allegedly conspired between May and September 2015 to obtain $42,485,900 from the bank. It is further alleged that they first received $22,485,900 in May 2015 and later secured an additional $20 million in September 2015 on the same basis.

The prosecution maintains that the funds were not used for the intended importation purposes but were instead diverted and converted in violation of the agreement governing the transactions. The alleged offences are said to contravene Sections 422, 419A, 421, and 390 of the Criminal Code Act.

The court also noted that Prem Garg and Devashish Garg are Indian nationals, Marcus Wade is a British citizen and chairman of Wilben Trade Limited, while Agrico Agbe Limited is a Nigerian company and Wilben Trade Limited is registered in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

During proceedings, Justice Aluko addressed the petition alleging misconduct and bias, referencing the Court of Appeal decision in Adio v. FRN (2019) LPELR-46793 (CA) to clarify issues surrounding lawyers holding watching briefs.

He explained that the appellate court did not prohibit such counsel from communicating information to the court but cautioned against filing formal processes without leave. The judge insisted that his conduct throughout the trial had been appropriate.

Justice Aluko also recalled an earlier session on October 23, 2025, when both prosecution and defence counsel were absent, noting that he had ordered hearing notices to be issued to ensure progress in the matter. He further suggested that the petition appeared to be an attempt to delay proceedings and criticised repeated absences by defence lawyers.

Citing professional conduct rules for legal practitioners, the judge stressed the obligation of lawyers to avoid actions capable of obstructing justice.

Although he dismissed the allegations against him as unproven, Justice Aluko stated that he was stepping aside to avoid any perception of bias. He added that he had no personal interest in the case or any of the over 1,000 matters before him.

The case file has now been returned to the Administrative Judge of the Federal High Court for reassignment, effectively stalling proceedings until a new judge is appointed.