illegal use of the Property or Funds, in that there is a wrongful assigning or setting apart of a Sum of Money for a purpose or use for which it should not lawfully be assigned or set apart. The PURPOSE for the Entrusted Monies was curved down and deviated from its SET TARGET directly to the Defendant’s PERSONAL BENEFIT OR GAINED ADVANTAGE/BENEFIT. As seen from the Charge Sheet, the Counts under the Offence of Dishonest Misappropriation as well as the facts and evidence presented before the Court are the same facts and evidence elicited under the Offence of Criminal Breach of Trust. Therefore, the Court would not restate them again but will regard the evidence as well as consider the Written Address of Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel already stated on Record for its deliberation. Each of the Counts under Criminal Misappropriation relate to the specific circumstances of Stationery, Grains, Presidential Visit and Liaison Office. Count 3 of the Charge is in regard to the Sum of One Hundred, and Eighty Million Naira (N180, 000, 000.00), which formed part of the Funds meant for the Purchase of Stationeries and Office Equipment.Having earlier found the Defendant Guilty of Criminal Breach of Trust, it is now important to decide whether the Defendant misappropriated or converted this Sum of Money. In his Statement admitted as Exhibit Z4 to Z6, the Defendant asserted that he knew the Managing Director of Salman Global Ventures, Mr. Ibrahim Abubakar as a businessman but did not know the details of his Company. He agreed to consult with the Government Officials who allegedly gave him Money, and whatever was his Share, he would return. He also identified Mr. Ibrahim Abubakar to be the Contractor for the Dome Tent, and knew Mr. Ibrahim Abubakar was involved in the Ibi Wukari Water Project and stated that he was told his share of the Funds was Eighty Million Naira (N80, 000, 000), which he did not receive directly, but was posted to Mr. Ibrahim Abubakar’s Account. The Money was later refunded and he did not directly benefit from the Water Project. There is also the fact of the Defendant’s more than casual interest in the fact that the Representative did not take his 246