evidence they choose to present and in this instance regarding the Inquiry before the House, they sank with their evidence because the Defendant was exonerated. It is not the place of the Defence to challenge the Strategy adopted by the Prosecution in their choice of their Fielded Witnesses. The same analogy applies to the various Witnesses said to have been summoned by the Prosecution to testify in their regard before the Federal High Court in Kaduna State and before this present Court. Aside of the obvious fact that the Prosecution has a prerogative or discretion in calling Witnesses, there is also the obvious fact that the Charges at both the Federal High Court and this Court are different. The Class of Witnesses expected to prove the Offences under the Miscellaneous Offences Decree as Amended by the Tribunals (Certain Consequential Amendments, etc.,) Decree No. 62 of 1999 and those necessary to establish the Offences of Abetment and Conspiracy are not necessarily the Class of Witnesses relevant under a Charge of Criminal Breach of Trust and Criminal Misappropriation. The thrust of the Prosecution in Kaduna was to prosecute the Bankers for Abetment. Here in this Court, the thrust was specifically against the Defendant for the Offences of Criminal Breach of Trust and Criminal Misappropriation and therefore, the Trial before this Court can conceivably tolerate another Class of Witnesses. Therefore, the Objections raised in regard to Witnesses, is found untenable and the Objections are discountenanced. The Second Issue set out for determination by the Court is as regards the Questions of Issue Estoppel, and Charges and will be considered in the order they are stated above. As regards Issue Estoppel, Learned Silk representing the Defendant had centered his submissions on an Earlier Judgment of the Federal High Court as well as the Decision of the Plateau State House of Assembly. He relied on the Judgment delivered by my Learned Brother, Liman J. of the Federal High Court, sitting in Kaduna delivered on the 29th of July 2005, which was tendered and admitted without any Objection, as Exhibit D21B in Charge No: FHC/KD/144C/2004 in the case of FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA VS AWE ODESSA & 5 ORS. In this case, Officials of AllStates Trust Bank, were charged under a Four Count Charge of Conspiracy to commit a Felony, which consisted in accepting from the Defendant, a Central Bank Cheque knowing that it was unlawfully procured and agreeing to do an illegal act by aiding and facilitating the misappropriation by the Defendant of the proceeds of the Central Bank Cheque in the Sum of N1, 161, 162, 900.00 (One Billion, One Hundred and Sixty Two Million, Nine Hundred Thousand Naira Only). The Bankers were all acquitted on the ground that there was no proof that Chief Joshua Dariye, had misappropriated the proceeds of the Cheque as alleged. The Court had also held that the act of the Defendant in disbursing the Funds was the Official Act of the Government of Plateau State. Learned Silk pointed out that in both cases concerning the Bankers in Kaduna State and this present case, the Complainant, remained the same, namely the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. Therefore, he concluded that the Findings of Liman J. that the Defendant did not dishonestly misappropriate Funds ESTOPS the Prosecution from continuing to contend the contrary in this present case, as the issues, facts, Witnesses and evidence proferred in the two cases are the same. According to him, the Judgment of Liman J., found the Defendant Not Guilty of Criminal Breach of Trust. He noted that the Prosecution is bound by this Judgment, moreso, as the Prosecution did not 15