robbery there is either theft or extortion. The section went ahead and prescribed theft as robbery where the offender in committing the theft, or in carrying away the property obtained by theft, the offender causes or lawful restraint upon his victim (as in this case). PW1 one Faruk Liman Ambursa testified before this court that the defendant and his associate in crime, tied him in the bush before they dispossessed him of the motorcycle. That piece of evidence was also corroborated by Exhibit A1 which is the English translate version of the defendant’s extrajudicial statement where the defendant categorically stated that they tied PW1 in the bush before they disposed him of the motorcycles. From a plethora of judicial authorities, the essential elements of robbery required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution as required by law, are as follows:(i) That there was indeed a robbery; (ii) That the robbers were not armed with dangerous weapons; and (iii) That the accused was the robber or one of the robbers who took part in the robbery operation. - Sani V. State (2014) 1 NWLR Pt 187 P 1. - Smart V. State (2016) 9 NWLR Pt 1518 P 447. - Osetola V. State (2012) 17 NWLR PT 1329 P 251. - Sowemimo V. State (2012) 2 NWLR PT 1284 P 372. - Bisi V. State (2021) 12 NWLR Pt 1790 P 205. - Omoha V. State (2023) LPELR 61384. - Adeleke V. State (2013) LPELR 20971. Page 10 of 14