A Nigerian court has convicted and sentenced a First Bank customer, Ojo Eghosa Kingsley, to one year imprisonment with an option of a N5 million fine over his refusal to fully refund N1.5 billion that was mistakenly credited to his bank account.
The conviction followed Kingsley’s guilty plea at his first court appearance, after investigators established that a substantial portion of the funds had already been recovered through the combined efforts of First Bank of Nigeria and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
According to updates surrounding the case, about N1.2 billion to N1.3 billion had been recovered or reversed from Kingsley’s account and related accounts, leaving an outstanding balance estimated at between N272 million and N280 million.
Reacting to early reports, legal analyst and social media commentator Mayowa J. Michael (@HolyMikel) clarified that the widely circulated narrative was inaccurate.
“This is a wrong narrative. The court asked him to refund the outstanding balance and then sent him to jail for one year with an option of N5 million fine since he pleaded guilty at the first hearing. The outstanding balance of N272 million would still be paid even if he chooses to go to jail,” he said.
Further clarifying the legal implications, crypto analyst @TheopilusE stated that imprisonment does not absolve the convict of financial liability.
“About N1.2 billion has already been recovered through the combined efforts of EFCC and First Bank. It’s the remaining N280 million he refused to refund and went to jail for,” he explained.
Some commentators also warned that refusing to pay restitution could have long-term consequences beyond the one-year sentence.
“Choosing to serve one year sentence doesn’t free him from the liability of the N272 million the court is still ordering him to pay,” wrote @0xDeFi419. “By refusing to pay both the fine and restitution, he risks prolonged incarceration.”
The case has sparked widespread public debate, with many Nigerians questioning how such a large sum could remain in a customer’s account for months without detection, while others stressed the legal principle involved.
Legal educator @AfricanMaester emphasised that keeping money credited in error constitutes a criminal offence.
“Keeping money sent to you by mistake isn’t grace, it’s a crime. Once you realise the money isn’t yours and you refuse to return it, you’ve crossed from luck into criminality,” he said.
Despite public speculation and criticism of banking controls, legal experts maintain that the court’s decision underscores the obligation of individuals to return funds that do not belong to them, regardless of how the money came into their possession.
Investigations into the circumstances surrounding the mistaken transfer and internal banking controls are expected to continue, while enforcement agencies pursue full recovery of the outstanding balance.
