14 Months behind bars, Rushil Singh fights for bail amid fraud case

Businessman Rushil Singh is set to return to the Palm Ridge Specialised Commercial Crime Court on Thursday for his long-awaited bail hearing, as the prosecution’s case against him continues to unravel under the weight of new evidence and damaging witness concessions.

Singh has been detained for 14 months on allegations of fraud, forgery, and uttering related to guarantees allegedly issued by Stanbic Bank Ghana Limited on behalf of his company, Big Business Innovations Group (Pty) Ltd (BIG). These guarantees were presented to Investec Bank in support of loans totalling more than R178 million, which Stanbic Ghana later disavowed.

However, the State’s first witness in the ongoing trial has made a series of critical admissions under oath that have severely undermined the credibility of the prosecution’s case.

Key Witness Concessions

The witness confirmed that the two affidavits used to secure Singh’s arrest did not implicate him in any wrongdoing. These documents, presented to obtain an arrest warrant, were the sole basis of his detention. This revelation calls into question the lawfulness of his arrest, as no direct evidence linked him to the alleged offences at the time.

The witness further admitted that a third affidavit, which for the first time introduced allegations against Singh, was created only after the death of his sister, Nishani Singh, who had been the company’s financial director and the main operational figure in the alleged transactions. This posthumous affidavit, the defence argues, reflects a deliberate effort to manufacture culpability once Nishani could no longer defend herself.

In another major concession, the witness acknowledged that the signature on the disputed financial statements was not Rushil Singh’s, but that of another company director. This discovery corroborates the defence’s claim that Singh was falsely linked to falsified documents he neither signed nor authorised.

The witness’s evolving testimony directly contradicts the State’s earlier assertion that its investigation was complete at the time of Singh’s arrest. Instead, it now appears that the case is built on shifting statements and unverified claims, rather than solid evidence

Judicial Developments

Adding to the State’s difficulties, Magistrate Venter recently refused the prosecution’s attempt to amend the charge sheet, signalling growing judicial concern over the integrity of the State’s case. The court emphasised that prosecutors cannot continuously alter their theory to compensate for weaknesses in evidence.

Despite these damaging admissions, Singh remains in detention. His defence has described his continued incarceration as a gross miscarriage of justice, noting that no direct evidence connects him to any of the alleged fraudulent acts.

Defence Position

Singh’s legal team maintains that he was wrongfully arrested based on false and evolving affidavits, and that the forged financial statements now serve as proof that he had no knowledge of any fraud or forgery within the company. They argue that the State’s shifting narrative and failed attempts to rewrite the charge sheet reflect an absence of credible evidence, and that bail should now be immediately granted.

Broader Implications

The case has exposed deep flaws in the investigation conducted by the Hawks, as well as procedural lapses in the prosecution’s handling of financial evidence. Observers say it also raises concerns about investigative accountability and the safeguards that should protect individuals from being detained on inaccurate or incomplete affidavits.

With the witness’s testimony now undermining every major claim advanced by the State, the focus shifts to whether the court will grant Singh bail.

Thursday’s bail hearing may mark a turning point in a case that has come to symbolise the dangers of prosecution built on conjecture rather than proof, and a man’s 14-month struggle to reclaim his freedom from an evidently collapsing case.