300,000) was paid to the Supplier in Cash and Grains were delivered. The fact that the Defendant did not mention this fact in his Statementdid not make the fact an Afterthought, because the Defendant had explained that all the facts contained in his Statements, were based on what he was questioned on and the questions he was asked,were not couched in that manner. Learned Counsel further contended that even in Exhibit Z6, there is nothing therein that showed that the Defendant admitted that he paid the Sum of Twenty Four Million Three Hundred Thousand Naira (N24,300, 000.00) personally to any Contractor to supply the Grains or that he received the said Money meant for the Purchase of the Grains or Rice. An Essential Ingredient in the Offence Charged cannot be cured by a Confession, and must still be proved by the Prosecution, and he cited the Case Law Authority of SURUJ PAUL VS R (1958) 3 ALL ER. 300. Submitting further, Learned Counsel argued that there is evidence on Record revealing that it is the Auditor-General that had the responsibility of making Enquiries as to whether Government Money released was used for what it was meant for. There is no Evidence on Record that there was a Complaint by anybody or that the Grains were not distributed. The Evidence on Record through PW9 has established that Mr. Adamu Aboki is the only Witness that can link the Defendant to the Charge regarding the Twenty-Three Million Naira meant for Grains (sic). There is nowhere in the Testimony of PW5, or PW8 or any Witness at all that the Money in question, or any Part thereof, was given to the Defendant personally, or was to be delivered to anybody at any place upon the direct instruction of the Defendant. The Complainant attempted to supply a nonexistent piece of evidence through Counsel’s Address, which in Law is not proper or acceptable. He relied on the cases of SUNDAY VS STATE (2018) 1 NWLR PT 1600 P.251 @ 272 PARA C-D and ARAB BANK VS FELLY KEME NIG. LTD & ANOR (1995) 4 NWLR PT 387, 100 @ 111, and urged the 142