UZO L NDUKWE-ANYANWU, JCA: I had the privilege of reading in draft form, the Judgment just delivered by my learned brother Chinwe Eugenia Iyizoba JCA. I am in total agreement with his reasoning and final conclusion. "Conspiracy is an agreement of two or more persons to do an act which it is an offence to agree to do. The very plot is an act itself and the act of each of the parties, promise against promise capable of being enforced if lawful, is punishable if it is for criminal object or the use of criminal means. In short, it is the agreement to do an act which it is an offence to agree to do which constitutes the offence of conspiracy under the Criminal Code", per Fatayi Williams JSC in Olushegun Haruna vs. The State (1972) 8-9SCpage 108(1972)All NLR page 738. It is true that conspiracy may exist between people who have never seen each other like in this case. It is worrisome to note that the Appellant did not hand over any papers to the 2nd Accused person. The Appellant handed over to Ibrahim Maidurumi who handed over to Audu Ismail. Ibrahim Maidurumi later as PW10 gave evidence. There is a chain link between the Appellant, Ibrahim Maidurumi, Audu Ismail and finally Ugwu Geoffrey the 2nd Accused. The Appellant and the 2nd Accused are the 1st and 4th in the chain. The 2nd and 3rd in the chain Ibrahim Maidurumi and Audu Ismail were not charged. It is doubtful that the Appellant and the 2nd Accused were in agreement. The 2nd Accused was running around to clear the containers with the bills of lading given to him. Even when he could not trace the address he continued in the process of clearing the containers. If the PW10, a Custom officer handed over to Audu Ismail who handed to 2nd Accused Ugwu Geoffrey, why were they all not charged; Is it not the same handing over from one person to the other. Were the Appellant and the 2nd accused being made scapegoat of what the 2nd Accused did not know. In my own humble opinion, the 2nd accused, the 4th person in this chain could not have been said to conspire with the Appellant who did not hand over any document to him. I find it difficult to find that there is any conspiracy between the two persons charged without the PW10 and Audu Ismail. The chain and the connection was broken. “It is well established that it is the duty of the prosecution to place before the court all available relevant evidence. This does not mean of course, that a whole host of witnesses must be called upon the same point but it does mean that if there is a vital