relied on the Case of ONAGORUWA STATE (1993) 7 NWLR (PT.303) 49 @ 91, PARA A-D. Learned Senior Counsel to the Prosecution on his own part, submitted that the evidence adduced before the Court showedthat the Defendant committed the Offence of Criminal Breach of Trust because Salman Global Ventures Nigeria Limited was given a Cheque for a Contract they did not bid for. The Cheque was fraudulently disposed off contrary to the Directives for Direct Purchase in the Memo, Exhibit CC. In his Reply on Points of Law to the above contention, Learned Counsel to the Defence maintained that the Ingredients of Misappropriation and Conversion have not been proved, because it was not shown that the Defendant received these Monies, either physically or through the crediting of his Bank Account. According to him, the Argument of the Complainant that the Defendant, as Governor of a State, took advantage of his position and trust imposed on him to fraudulently convert the State Government Resources to his own use,was not borne out of the evidence before this Court, and he urged the Court to disregard this line of argument. Now, it is important to note that Section 311 of the Penal Code, the Definitive Section, lists the Elements of the Offence in a DISJUNCTIVE FASHION by the consistent use of the word “OR”. This is to say that any of the underlisted could operate independently in order to establish the Offence, as proof of one, dispenses with proof of the others. Whilst Entrustment is paired with Dominion, the Prosecution may then decide to proceed on the basis of any of the Four Options, or Quadruplet Modes, through which the Entrustment or Dominion was breached. It is very important to understand, that none of the Quadruplet Modes takes greater pre-eminence over the other, as Proof of One is sufficient to sustain the Charge. 34