proven beyond reasonable doubt, this court is called upon by the defence counsel to take cognisance of the mental state of the defendant which was highlighted at the earliest possible time. The learned counsel stated further that where a defence of insanity is raised, the onus is on the defendant to prove same because this is a fact within the knowledge of the defendant. On this the learned defence counsel referred this court to the evidence of DW1 who is the elder brother to the defendant. According to the learned defence counsel DW1 led evidence to show that the defendant was of unsound mind. The learned counsel further stated that this is also evident from the medical report from the Federal Neuropsychiatric hospital Kware, exhibit C. The learned counsel further stated that where the defence of insanity is successfully pleaded, the defendant cannot be found guilty of the offence and this is because on exhibit A and A1 the statement of the defendant to the police at the C.I.D office Sokoto. According to the learned defence pw1 alledged that he took the statement of the defendant without the defendant’s legal representation or any of the defendant’s relatives. According to the defence counsel failure of pw1 to establish compliance with the mandatory provisions of the ACJL 20