during the cross-examination of the accused by the prosecutor, the accused denied ever making the statement and counsel to the accused objected to the admissibility of the said statement notwithstanding, the court admitted the confessional statement in evidence. See BORISHADE v F.R.N (2012) 18 NWLR 9Pt 1332) P 347 where the court held as follows: “Where an accused person challenges the correctness of the statement as recorded or the signature or thumb impression, then that will be question of fact to be decided by the trial court” The prosecutor failed to call the Investigating Police Officer to tender the confessional statement of the accused person in evidence; the prosecutor only called one witness from Habib Nigeria Bank Limited and closed his case; he told the court he could not locate the I.P.O. The question that arises is whether the court can admit confessional statement of accused person in the absence of I.P.O. and through the accused person, who had denied making such confessional statement. See the case of OKEKE v OBIDIFE & OTHERS 1965 4 NSCC 36 where the Supreme Court held as follows: “Secondly, the appellant submit that the judge ought not to have treated the statement contained in the Police file as admissible evidence on the ground that the officer to whom it was made was not called as a witness. In a criminal case this would be a valid objection but in a civil case formal proof of a document can always be waived” 8