deceased person’s sudden act of provocation that he reacted the way he did leading to the death of the deceased. The defendant must show that he re-acted before passion abated or vaporized the provocation act must however be such that would deprive the defendant of self-centrol suddenly and temporarily - Ahmed V. State (2008) 29 WRN 27. - Akalezi V. State (1993) 2 NWLR pt 273 p 1. The question one will ask at this juncture is whether from both the evidence of prosecution and the defence, evidence exist before this court revealing the provocation offered by the deceased to the defendant which caused the defendant to lose his self-control? The answer in my humble view is in the affirmative. From the earlier quoted portion of the defendant’s statement which was substantially corroborated by his oral evidence, the defendant was attacked by the deceased when he inflicted a machete cut on the defendant head without the oremidation of the defendant. PW3 also testified to the fact that when the defendant was brought to CID Office, he observed that the defendant had some injuries on his head. In fact even the contents of the charge against the defendant appeared to support the claim of the defendant with regard to the fact that it was the deceased who first attacked the defendant. In Page 29 of 34