defence. He urged the Court to rely on all the evidence adduced by the Prosecution in this case and on its strength convict and sentence the Defendant accordingly. I have considered the evidence led and submission of the learned Counsel for the Prosecution. It is trite law that in criminal proceedings such as this, the burden of proof lies squarely on the Prosecution, and it must establish the guilt of the Defendant beyond reasonable doubt. It is only after such proof that the burden will shift to the Defendant to establish reasonable doubt. See: Sections 131 and 135 of the Evidence Act, 2011 and AGU v STATE (2017) LPELR-41664(SC), per Sanusi, JSC at pages 51 – 52, paras. E – A; OSUAGWU v STATE (2016) LPELR40836(SC), per Nweze, JSC at pages 36 – 37, paras. A – E; LAWAL v STATE (2016) LPELR-40633(SC), per Kekere-Ekun, JSC at pages 32 – 33, paras. F – C; and ABDU v STATE (2016) LPELR-41461(SC), per Sanusi, JSC at page 9, paras. C – F. In the instant case, the Defendant was arraigned before this Court on the 22nd of February, 2017 on a two count charge of conspiracy contrary to Section 8(a) and punishable under Section 8(c) and 1(3) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act No. 14 of 2006; and obtaining money by false pretence contrary to Section 1(1) and punishable under Section 1(3) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006. It is also settled that the guilt of a Defendant is established through any one or more of the following methods: (i) By direct evidence of eye witness(es); 12