Procuring, Accepting or Presenting to another Person, a Cheque knowing it to be false, forged, stolen or unlawfully procured. It is from this Ruling on a No-Case Submission, that Learned Silk, Kanu Agabi SAN, evoked the Question of Issue Estoppel. He specifically drew out the fact that my Learned Brother had held “that the Funds had not been misappropriated by the Defendant and that the disbursement of the Funds, was done pursuant to an Official Instruction given by the Government of Plateau State”, which he argued “constitutes a Gross Abuse of the Judicial Process to reopen and seek to re-litigate the very same Issue.” He stated that the Issue of Disbursement of these Funds was part of the allegations in that Case. A careful read and an appreciation of facts in the Two Decisions of Liman J. would show that the Defendant was NOT a Participant at that Trial. Learned Silk representing the Prosecution had submitted that the Defendant’s Preliminary Objection centered on his Immunity, which was upheld and his name was struck off the Charge. From Liman J.’s Ruling, one can see that Learned Counsel representing the 1st and 3rd Defendants, in his arguments on Count 2, submitted that the Prosecution woefully failed to prove that they accepted the Central Bank of Nigeria Cheque from Joshua Chibi Dariye, as all the Prosecution did, was to show that the Cheque was used in opening an Account. As regards Count 4, he contended that the absence of a Principal Offender to be instigated, constituted no Offence of Abetment. Learned Silk representing the 2nd Defendant submitted inter alia that “No evidence was laid by the Prosecution to establish that Exhibit A and A1 were unlawfully procured and further, that there was no evidence to show that the 2nd Defendant aided Chief J.C. Dariye to criminally misappropriate or dishonestly misappropriate to his own use or some other use, the Sum of N1, 161, 162, 900 in any way or manner whatsoever. And neither was there evidence to prove disbursement or authority to disburse the various Sums for the benefit or use of Chief J.C. Dariye. Paul Erokoro SAN in his Submission regarding Count 4 of the Charge submitted that, “No iota of evidence was adduced to show that the Cheque was unlawfully procured”. The Trial Judge Liman J. had pointed out in his Considered Ruling that Erokoro SAN appeared to have mixed up his Submissions with the facts in Case N0: FHC/KD/143C/2004, with the facts of the Case he was considering. He also questioned whether the Prosecution laid any evidence to prove any of the Counts of Offences and whether they laid any evidence to prove that the Cheque was unlawfully procured. He held that the Prosecution did not prove that the Bankers had direct knowledge that the Cheque was unlawfully procured and held that the failure of the Prosecution to prove this, was fatal to his case. The Extract of His Lordship’s Ruling culled by Learned Silk representing the Defendant was accurate but this view was held in the light of Exhibit E6, which was the Written Authority to disburse the Funds. One thing that flows from this is that, Exhibit E6, (which is tendered before this Court as Exhibit P4 Page 3), is said to be the “formal authority by the Executive Governor Plateau State of Nigeria, Chief Joshua Chibi Dariye.” With this Exhibit, his Lordship found it difficult to say that the Authority to disburse was not the Official Act of Plateau State Government. He was also unable to see how this disbursement disclosed any Dishonest Misappropriation. In the Penultimate Paragraph of this Ruling in Exhibit D21B, His Lordship asked some very pertinent questions and it is better expressed in his own words, which are as follows: 23