released on bonds and so urged this court to invoke the provisions of section 167(d) of the Evidence Act, 2011. - Union Bank of Nig. ltd V. Michael Nnoli {1990} 4 NWLR pt 145 p 530 at 546 - Habib Nig. Bank Plc V. Fat Hundeen Syeed {1992} 7NWLR pt 251 p 43. - Buhari V. Olusegun {2005} 2NWLR pt 910 p 241. Defence counsel further contended that the officer from whom the AK47 riffle was stolen, was not called by the prosecution despite the fact that he is a material witness which is fatal to the case of the prosecution. - Okoroji V. State {2001} FWLR pt 77 p 871 He therefore urge the court to discharge the defendant in respect of the offence of theft. As to the offence of armed robbery that the victims were not called to give evidence as vital witnesses and that identification parade was not conducted. These failures he submitted, is also fatal to the prosecution’s case. - Section 167(d) of the Evidence Act, 2011. - Union Bank of Nig. ltd V. Michael Nnoli {supra} - Habib Nig. Bank Plc V. Fat Hundeen Syeed {supra}. It was also the contention of the defence counsel that the statement of the defendant which was admitted in evidence and marked as exhibit A and A1, was never made by the defendant voluntarily and that the defendant is not the maker of the statement. Page 4 of 18