Court to hold that the Defendant was not established to have collected the Money meant for the Purchase of Grains, or to have Misappropriated same contrary to the submission of the Complainant. In his further submission, he stated that the failure to call Mr. Adamu Aboki for any reason whatsoever, is a clear demonstration that the alleged Offence of Criminal Breach of Trust regarding the Sum of Twenty-Four Million Three Hundred Thousand Naira (N24 300, 000) for the Purchase of Grains is a mere speculation, and the Court has a Duty to Discharge and Acquit the Defendant. The Defence premised his argument on the Right to Presumption of Innocence in the 1999 Constitution (As Amended) and the cases of ADENIYI VS FRN (2012) 1 NWLR (PT. 1281) 284 @ 295 and ALI VS STATE (2012) 7 NWLR (PT. 1299) 209 @ 236, PARAS A-D. Learned Counsel submitted with regard to the absence of Mr. Adamu Aboki, that the explanation given by Complainant is an explanation regarding the invitation of Mr. Adamu Aboki during the investigation, and not the explanation of his absence during the Trial. Even the said Letters of Invitation claimed to have been written by PW9 and PW12 were not presented before the Court, and during the Trial no effort was made to serve him with a Summons. The explanation given by the Complainant for the absence of Mr. Adamu Aboki was rather weak, especially since he is a Public Figure who contested the election into the House of Representative. The cases of BUBA VS STATE, SAIDU VS STATE, OGUALA VS STATE and OJIOFOR VS STATE relied on by the Complainantare inapplicable to this case and he urged the Court to decline reliance on these Cases. The Evidence of Mr. Wubon was challenged by the Defendant, therefore the fact that Mr. Wubon stated that the Defendant had warned him earlier not to seek clarification about any Instruction through Mr. Adamu Aboki, needs Further Proof. The Complainant did not provide this further proof, and therefore it cannot be said that there is proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt. 143