TransparencIT
TransparencIT
@TransparencITng

Fraud

Jun 10, 2026

FRN vs Mansur Mahmoud (Accountant of Ringim Emirate Council of Jigawa State)

Humans

Mansur Mahmoud

Money bag

N12,430,000.00
Amount allegedly defrauded

Money bag

Case Summary
The Defendant allegedly obtained the said sum as loan for the payment of the Emirate staff salary and running costs but refused to refund the money after the Emirate had received its allocation. All efforts to get the money back from the Defendant proved abortive.

Calendar

2,436
Day(s) case tried in court

Gavel

Case Update
The trial Judge, ruling on a no-case submission, discharged and acquitted the defendant on the grounds that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court described the testimony of the fourth prosecution's witness, who is the Investigation Officer (IO) of the case, as hearsay.

Court house

Hon. Justice Ado Yusuf Birnin-Kudu
State High Court, Jigawa

Legislation

ACJA/ACJL Compliance - violated

Case Information
Mansur Mahmoud
Presiding Judge & Designated Court
Hon. Justice Ado Yusuf Birnin-Kudu, State High Court, Jigawa
Nature and Number of Charges
1-count charge bordering on cheating.
Date of 1st Arraignment
Oct 9, 2019
Summary of Case
The Defendant allegedly obtained the said sum as loan for the payment of the Emirate staff salary and running costs but refused to refund the money after the Emirate had received its allocation. All efforts to get the money back from the Defendant proved abortive.
Defendant(s) and Plea entered on Arraignment
1. Mansur Mahmoud (Accountant of Ringim Emirate Council, Jigawa State) – Not Guilty
Defence Counsel(s)
No defence counsel
Prosecuting Agency
Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
Prosecutor(s)
1. Zarami Muhammad (Lawyer)
Status of Case
Decided
Decision
Discharged and Acquitted
Length of Trial
2,436 day(s)
ACJA/ACJL Compliance
Violated
Court Decision
The trial Judge, ruling on a no-case submission, discharged and acquitted the defendant on the grounds that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court described the testimony of the fourth prosecution's witness, who is the Investigation Officer (IO) of the case, as hearsay.