made by the defendant to the police at the C.I.D office Sokoto was also tendered in evidence through pw1 as exhibit A and A1 respectively. In exhibit A and A1 the defendant told the police how he took the victim Nana Firdausi Bello into his room and how he removed her panties and rubbed his penis on her virgina. He also narrated how the girl informed her mother about the incident and how the mother in company of some people came looking for him and how he escaped to Gagi bush where he hide and later returned home and he was arrested. The learned defence counsel in her written submissions before this court attacked both the medical report exhibit B and the extrajudicial statement of the defendant exhibit A and A1. In respect of the medical report exhibit B I already made a finding that exhibit B is not a photocopy and therefore not a secondary evidence and was therefore properly admitted in evidence and properly marked as such. In respect of exhibit A and A1, it is the contention of the learned defence counsel that exhibit A and A1 were recorded in the absence of a legal practitioner or any relative of the defendant and therefore contravened section 17(2) of the ACJL 2019. I’m unable to agree with the learned defence counsel that this court should reject 24