struck when the sword was brimming and blazing with flames of fire nor struck when the flames fizzled out and became as cold as ever. There is nothing before the Court to show that the Defendant followed the Complaint through, as he simply denied the fact of this Complaint made by Mrs. Asabe Maiangwa and denied ever having such discourse with her. But Mrs. Asabe Maiangwa did not stop right there. According to her, she confronted the Commissioner of Finance, Alhaji Abubakar Tutare on his return, who told her that he was directed to pay the Sum of One Hundred and Eighty Million Naira (N180, 000, 000) to Salman Global Ventures. Since the Cheque for Bulk Purchase of Stationeries and Office Equipment worth the Sum of Two Hundred and Thirty Million Naira (N250, 000, 000) had been released to Salman Global Ventures Nigeria Limited, why then would the Defendant instruct the Sum of One Hundred and Eighty Million Naira (N180, 000, 000) to be paid to Salman Global Ventures Nigeria Limited? The Defence Counsel, Olalekan Ojo contended that this piece of evidence rendered by Mrs. Asabe Maiangwa was Hearsay Evidence, which ought not to be relied upon by this Court and cited the case of OKEREKE VS UMAHI (2016) 11 NWLR PART 1524 PAGE 438 AT PAGE 489 PARAS F-G. Learned Senior Counsel, Rotimi Jacobs SAN, argued as incorrect and misconceived, the above contention by stating that Mrs. Asabe Maiangwa gave evidence of what she heard, which PW10, Alhaji Abubakar Tutare supported in his unshaken testimony in Court. Therefore, Mrs. Asabe Maiangwa’s evidence cannot suffice as Hearsay. Learned Senior Counsel made reference to the Case of UTTEH VS STATE (1992) 2 NWLR PART 223 PAGE 257 AT PAGE 269 (SC); SECTION 126(b) OF THE EVIDENCE ACT 2011 (AS AMENDED). 83