crimeUnder review

Businessman in court for allegedly defrauding colleague of $3.5m

Businessman in court for allegedly defrauding colleague of $3.5m

Businessman in court for allegedly defrauding colleague of $3.5m. An Adenta Circuit Court has granted bail to a businessman allegedly involved in a US$3.5 million fraud case. Prosecutors told the Court that Mohammed allegedly collected the money from the complainant in 2022 under the pretext of facilitating the shipment of an investment fund allegedly valued at US$400 million to Nigeria.

An Adenta Circuit Court has granted bail to a businessman allegedly involved in a US$3.5 million fraud case.

Amadou Mohammed, 53, has pleaded not guilty to defrauding by false pretences.

Prosecutors told the Court that Mohammed allegedly collected the money from the complainant in 2022 under the pretext of facilitating the shipment of an investment fund allegedly valued at US$400 million to Nigeria.

The prosecution said Mohammed and the complainant were business partners at the time of the alleged transaction.

The Court granted Mohammed bail in the sum of GH¢400,000, with two sureties to be justified with landed property.

Counsel for the accused applied for bail.

The court adjourned the case to November 24, 2026.

  • court
  • businessman
  • mohammed
  • bail
  • colleague
  • case
  • complainant
  • adenta

Summaries and tags are generated automatically. Stay informed with VidiaNews.

Related news

Court dismisses Adu-Boahene’s bid to strike out portions of prosecution’s reply to his no-case submission
crime

Court dismisses Adu-Boahene’s bid to strike out portions of prosecution’s reply to his no-case submission

The Accra High Court has refused a request by former National Signals Bureau Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene and his co-accused to expunge parts of the prosecution’s written arguments in the ongoing criminal trial. Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai opposed the application, contending that the court had no general jurisdiction to strike out parts of a lawyer’s written address merely because the opposing party challenged their accuracy.

Read →