Today, many people, collecting transportation money from someone with a promise to visit is just cruise and a normal trend that is harmless and this usually occurs between a man and a woman. However, this act is not harmless as believed by many but is a criminal act as provided in Section of the Criminal Code which deals with issues bordering on obtaining by false pretence, reports Nigerian Tribune.
Recently, the news that a lady was sentenced to a prison term of seven years or in lieu given a fine of N450,000 went viral, what made the case newsworthy was the offence for which she was convicted.
A Magistrate Court found her guilty of collecting N30, 000 as transport fare to visit a man in his home but failed to fulfill the promise of visiting the man.
This is not the first of such cases, there are so many of such and while many do not get to court, many that get to court don’t get reported. A similar story broke in January when a Magistrate Court in Ilesa, Osun State, ordered a lady to pay N150,000 after she collected N3,000 from a man and failed to visit.
People have wondered why a personal arrangement between a man and a woman should become a criminal offence.
But it is a fact that if the aggrieved party wants to contest such personal breach, there can be remedies under the law and it is not about transport fare as it is usually reported but on a more serious provision of law known as obtaining by false pretence as provided in Section 419 of the Criminal Code and similar state provisions in the Nigerian law such as Section 1 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offenses Act,.
So, the question of which offence would be relied on and what the prosecution must prove is answered adequately under Section 419 of the Constitution.
This section is why the term 419 is common for fraud in Nigeria.
The Criminal Code criminalises obtaining by false pretence “with intent to defraud” and prescribes imprisonment of three years generally but up to seven years where the thing obtained is of the value of ₦1,000 or upwards.
In this case, the prosecution would have been expected to show not merely that the lady accepted transport money and did not show up, but that at the time she had induced the payment of money by the man, she intended to deceive him (i.e., she had no intention to honour the promise). This may be proven through the use of text messages, bank transfer records, witnesses, and the totality of conduct.
In cases like this, the Law makes it clear that the magistrate’s power to fine must not exceed the maximum fine provided for by the substantive law. Moreover, a Magistrate/Judge exercises discretion in meting out specific penalties which must not however, exceed the maximum penalty stipulated under the relevant statute. The Court would often consider certain factors in exercising this discretion such as, the nature or gravity of the offence, public order/deterrence or whether the person is a first-time offender/repeat offender, among other factors.
This means that in the case earlier cited, collecting ₦30,000 satisfies the “value” limb that attracts the penalty of seven years imprisonment.
But to prove the offence of obtaining by false pretence, the prosecution must show beyond reasonable doubt that there was a pretence put forward by the person being alleged, the pretence was false; the accused obtained money or induced delivery of money by that false pretence and did so with intent to defraud at the time of obtaining the money.
In this case however, the NGN 450,000 fine appears enormous compared to NGN 30,000 at issue but it is the discretion of the court and it may have been intentionally set that way to serve as deterrence to others.
And if appealed, a higher court may reduce either the fine or the prison term if it finds the sentence manifestly excessive.
Obtaining by false pretence
Obtaining by false pretence refers to deceiving someone to gain money, property, or other benefits under fraudulent circumstances. It is a serious offense under Nigerian law, and offenders can face severe penalties.
Under Section 1 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offenses Act, obtaining by false pretence is defined as, dishonestly inducing another person to transfer property or money based on false representation.
For an act to be considered as obtaining by false pretence; it must involve false representation in which the offender must make a deceptive claim, it must establish intent to defraud that the offender knowingly deceive the victim, there must be proof of actual loss or damage where the victim establishes that he suffered financial or material loss.
And even in cases where the victim did not lose money, but has lost something of value, it can still be obtaining by false pretence.
Common examples of false pretence in Nigeria are fake job offers requiring payment for “processing fees,” fraudulent real estate deals where buyers pay for non-existent properties, ponzi schemes promising unrealistic returns on investments and online scams involving impersonation of government officials.
But now, collecting transportation fee from a man when you know you will not visit has joined the list. While many see this as harmless, recent rulings on such matter has shown that it is illegal and a criminal act.
Consequences of Obtaining by False Pretence under the Nigerian law include imprisonment of up to 20 years for offenders depending on the severity of the fraud, fines and asset forfeiture to compensate victims and blacklisting from financial institutions for fraudulent activities.
In issues of false pretence cases in Nigeria, victims can report fraud to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Nigeria Police Force and the consumer protection agencies.
Legal Remedies for Victims
Victims of obtaining by false pretence in Nigeria have several legal remedies available to seek justice and recover their losses. The first step is filing a formal complaint with law enforcement agencies like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) or the Nigeria Police Force, which investigate and prosecute fraud cases. Additionally, courts may order the seizure of fraudulent assets and their return to the rightful owners. Seeking legal representation from a qualified lawyer can help victims navigate the justice system effectively, ensuring they receive fair compensation and hold offenders accountable. Click here to talk to a lawyer.
Examples of Cases
Oluwadahunsola Taiwo & 1 other (2025): Involves charges of obtaining money under false pretense, as part of a larger scheme involving dishonesty.
Ennis Olayinka Sunday v Federal Republic of Nigeria (2025): The appellant was prosecuted for falsely promising to invest money in an engine oil business, after which the money was transferred to another person instead of the agreed-upon investment.
Oluwasheun v Federal Republic of Nigeria (2016): This case involved an individual arrested by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for an alleged advance fee fraud scheme, where victims invested in a program that did not mature as promised.
FRN vs Clement Joseph: An individual was charged with obtaining N500,000 under false pretenses by claiming to be a native doctor who needed the money to purchase materials for a cleansing ritual to prevent death.
Olabamiji Michael Kayode v FRN: This case involved allegation of property fraud, where the defendant received money to rent out properties that were under renovation and allegedly failed to provide accommodation or refund the money.
Emmanuel Nwude v. Federal Republic of Nigeria
Case details: Between 1995 and 1998, Nwude, a former director of the Union Bank of Nigeria, orchestrated one of the largest banking frauds in history. He impersonated the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria and defrauded a Brazilian bank, Banco Noroeste, of $242 million by convincing one of its directors to “invest” in a non-existent airport project.
Outcome: Nwude was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison. The case was a landmark for the newly formed Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which was established to tackle such crimes.
R. V. Adeboyega
Case details: The court considered whether “money doubling” amounted to a false pretence. The decision suggested that the facts of each case would determine whether the crime was committed, highlighting the importance of the specific representation made to the victim.
FRN v. Mahmud A. Mohammed & 3 others
Case details: In this case, the defendants obtained $1 million from a victim under the false pretence of supplying Nigerian Bonny Light Crude Oil via a vessel, a claim they knew to be false.
Outcome: The court found the defendants guilty and sentenced them to 10 years’ imprisonment. The convicts were also ordered to refund the fraudulent proceeds to the victim, demonstrating the court’s power to enforce restitution.
Kole Bello v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2018)
Case details: The appellant was charged with conspiracy and obtaining money by false pretences in the Lagos State High Court.
Key legal principle: The case reviewed the essential elements a prosecutor must prove to secure a conviction for obtaining by false pretence. These include proving that there was pretence; the pretence originated from the accused, the pretence was false and the accused knew it was false, there was an intention to defraud and the false pretence induced the owner to transfer their property.
Criminal law and procedure
There are elements to be established by the prosecution to sustain a charge of obtaining money by false pretences; false representation, intent to defraud and actual loss or damage.
This can be established through gathering and presenting evidence that is proved beyond reasonable doubt before the court. The following procedures can be used in gathering evidence:
Evidence (Calling of witnesses): Whether in a criminal trial, a host of witnesses is required by the prosecution to achieve proof beyond reasonable doubt
Trial within trial: This is a full trial that takes place on a matter within a case
Confessional statement: Statements made by defender to law enforcement agents at the point of arrest.
Many people mistake the offence of obtaining by false pretence as smartness in Nigeria. It is wider than what we all call 419. A relative who deceives his kin to part with money or valuables in the pretext of needing help to pay medical bills is guilty of this crime and can be prosecuted and punished for it. Let the knowledge of this guide us to be on the right side of the law.
Generally, false pretense is a statutory offense and under common law, false pretense is defined as a representation of a present or past fact, which the thief knows to be false, and which he intends will and does cause the victim to pass title of his property.
