A vicar accused of presiding over hundreds of sham marriages has returned to his parish after the dramatic collapse of his immigration fraud trial.

Nathan Ntege on Sunday held his first service since his acquittal at St Judge and St Aidan Church of England Church, the Thornton Heath parish at which he had been charged with overseeing a "matrimonial conveyor belt" to illegally secure immigrants leave to remain in the UK.

A judge at Inner London Crown Court threw out the trial, which had wasted hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money, last week after it emerged UK Border Agency officers had deliberately concealed important evidence and lied under oath.

Judge Nic Madge ruled "bad faith and serious misconduct" had fatally undermined the case against the vicar and six other defendants, who were all acquitted and will face no retrial. 

The Home Office has suspended three officers and referred the case to the Independent Police Complaints Commission, while the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched an internal inquiry.

During the trial, prosecutor Edward Lucas told the court the number of weddings held at St Jude  and St Aidan had rocketed from six a year to six a week under Mr Ntege's stewardship.  

The jury heard immigrants queued outside the church to be married, with brides dressing in the toilets and aisles and sharing wedding gowns.

But Mr Ntege, who was charged with 14 counts of immigration fraud and one of defrauding the church out of £70,000 in wedding fees, attributed the rise to the increasing popularity of St Jude and St Aidan and said most of the 494 couples he married were "legitimate".

He could not be reached for comment today, but told Channel 4 following the trial's collapse: "I don't say we were not duped.

"There were some few who tried to use the advantage, but when they were exposed we reported it to the Home Office, we reported it to the diocese, we reported it to the police."

The vicar, of Dunheved Road North, Thornton Heath, continued to be paid and housed by the Diocese of Southwark after his arrest in June 2011 but was deprived of his ministry.

The diocese told the Croydon Guardian yesterday that Mr Ntege had now returned to his role and had been offered additional training.

A spokesman said: "The Diocese of Southwark has cooperated fully with the UK Border Agency enquiry and it is very regrettable that after such a long period the conduct of the investigation has been found to be an abuse of process.  

"As the case has been stayed the Revd Nathan Ntege has the right to return to work.  

"The Bishop of Southwark has already met with him to discuss supervision, oversight and support in the light of the issues raised by this matter."

Your Local Guardian:

Mr Ntege has returned to the church where he was accused of presiding over nearly 500 sham weddings

He added: "The diocese takes seriously its obligation to ensure the clergy are regularly offered up to date advice and training in both their legal and financial responsibilities.  

"The Rev Nathan Ntege has been offered such training in the past and the diocese hopes that the renewed offer will be accepted."

Brian Miller, St Aidan's verger, of South Croydon, its secretary Maudlyn Riveiere, of Thornton Heath, and alleged "fixers" Galena Petkova, of Enfield, and Georgia Forteath, of South Norwood, were also cleared last week along with a bride and groom accused of marrying illegally.

A Home Office spokesman said: "The collapse of this trial is an extremely disappointing end to a long investigation.

"We expect the highest standards from all our staff, and clearly we are treating the judge's ruling that our officers acted in bad faith with the utmost seriousness."

A CPS spokesman said: "We are now carefully considering the judge’s comments in relation to our handling of this case, which has clearly fallen below the high standards that we would expect. 

"We take these comments very seriously and we will now be conducting a full review into the handling of disclosure and other issues throughout the trial."

Why the trial collapsed: Judge Nic Madge's damning verdict

"I am satisfied that this is a case in which there has been both bad faith and serious misconduct on the part of the prosecution.

"I am satisfied that officers at the heart of this prosecution have deliberately concealed important evidence and lied on oath.

"That bad faith and misconduct started on June 4, 2011, when two of the principal defendants were arrested, and has continued throughout the course of this trial.

"In my judgment, it has tainted the whole case. It has tainted the prosecution against all seven defendants.

"When it comes to the balance between the public interest in ensuring that those who are accused of serious crimes should be tried and the competing public interest in ensuring that executive misconduct does not undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system and bring it into disrepute, I bear in mind Mr Lucas's submission that this is a serious case with significant public interest considerations. He does not concede there is not good evidence in relation to each defendant.

"However, in my judgment, the misconduct of the prosecution, and in particular the officer in the case and the disclosure officer, is so serious that these two officers have left me with no option other than to exercise my discretion to stay this prosecution.

"I am satisfied that this is an exceptional case in which it would be unfair for the defendants to continue to be tried. I am satisfied that a stay is necessary to protect the integrity of the criminal justice system.

"If the trial were to be permitted to continue there is a real risk that public faith in the criminal justice system would be undermined.

"It is a case in which the prosecution should not be allowed to benefit from the serious misbehaviour of the officer in the case or the disclosure officer.

"It is highly regrettable that the jury will not be able to return verdicts of guilty or not guilty based upon proper evidence and that a large amount of public money, probably hundreds of thousands of pounds, have been wasted in this investigation and trial.

"That though is the result of the misconduct of the officer in the case and the disclosure officer."