In consideration of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Araka V. Egbue {2003} 7SC75 at 82 in which the court held that the only acceptable secondary evidence of a public document is the certified true copy of the document coupled with the fact that the statements of the defendants marked and admitted as exhibits B, B1, C, C1, D and D1 for Hausa and English translated versions of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants respectively have been certified, I am certified that the said exhibits were properly admitted in evidence before the court explanations having been offered as to why as to why the originals cannot be tendered and this court has accepted them and will act upon them in the cause of this judgment, their admissibility having been justified by the foregoing provisions of sections 89(1) and 90(1)(a) of the Evidence Act 2011. - Minister of Lands, Western Nigeria V. Dr. Azikiwe {1969} 1 ALLNLR49 - Nzekwu V. Nzekwu {1989} 3 SC pt II p 76 - Fawehinmi V. IGP {2002} 5SC p I p 63 - Ogboru V. Uduaghan {2011} 2 NWLR pt 1232 p 538 - Ugoh V. B.S.L.G.S.C {1995} 3 NWLR pt 383 p 288 In Exhibit ‘B1’ which is the English translate version of the 1st defendant’s statement, the defendant stated as follows:“On the 6/04/2014 at about 0800hrs, I Abdulmuminu Yusuf, Musa Abdulkarim & Iliyasu Hassan all ‘m’ of same address came to Sokoto with the intention to rob motorcyclist. From the foregoing portion of the 1st defendant’s statement and the community efforts of all the defendants as disclosed by the substance of their respective statements coupled with the evidence of the victim who Page 11 of 18