In a courtroom scene that has left the public and legal practitioners alike in a state of incredulity, a First Bank customer, Ojo Eghosa Kingsley, has opted for a custodial sentence rather than repaying the remaining ₦272 million of a mistaken ₦1.5 billion windfall.
The extraordinary saga reached its climax at the Edo State High Court on the 19th of January 2026, where Kingsley was arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) following a six-month period of illicit financial indulgence.
The genesis of this legal battle dates back to June 2025, when a processing error by First Bank resulted in the accidental crediting of a staggering ₦1,500,000,000 to Kingsley’s personal account. Rather than fulfilling his civic and legal obligation to notify the financial institution of the anomaly, Kingsley chose to treat the funds as a personal fortune.
Between June and November 2025, the convict clandestinely diverted the capital for personal use. Investigations by the EFCC revealed a complex web of transfers; however, the commission successfully recovered ₦802,420,000 from accounts belonging to Kingsley, his mother, and his sister. Concurrently, First Bank managed to reverse transactions totalling in excess of ₦300 million.
Charged under the Edo State Criminal Law (2022) with counts of theft and fraud, Kingsley pleaded guilty without hesitation upon the reading of the charges. His legal counsel attempted to mitigate the severity of the fallout, appealing for the court’s leniency by citing his client’s apparent remorse and his lack of resistance during the proceedings.
Honourable Justice, presiding over the matter, delivered a sentence that offered the convict a choice between immediate financial penalty or the loss of liberty. The court’s judgment comprised:
- A one-year term of imprisonment, or the option of a ₦5 million fine; and
- A mandatory order to refund the outstanding balance of ₦272,252,193.59 to First Bank.
In a twist that stunned those in attendance, Kingsley informed the court that he preferred to serve the prison sentence rather than facilitate the refund of the outstanding ₦272 million. By choosing incarceration, the convict has effectively prioritised the retention of the misappropriated funds over his own freedom.
While the one-year sentence may appear brief in comparison to the sum involved, legal experts suggest that the order for restitution remains a civil liability that could haunt the convict long after his release. The EFCC has reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring that the proceeds of crime are fully recovered, regardless of the convict’s preference for a prison cell.
The case serves as a stark reminder of the legal repercussions surrounding “wrongful credits” and the robust stance of the Nigerian judiciary against financial opportunism.
