principle laid down in those two (2) cases “is still extant and applicable”. The lower Court, however, found the principle inapplicable to the instant case “since the provisions of Section [396(7)] of the ACJA specifically permit or authorize the Hon. M. B. Idris, JCA to sit in the lower Court as a Judge of that Court for the purpose of concluding part-heard criminal matters commenced but not concluded by him before his elevation to (Court of Appeal)”. I have been trying to demonstrate the fallacy of this argument advanced by the lower Court. Section 254(1) of the 1979 Constitution, the subject of interpretation providing the anchor on which the decision in OUR LINE LTD v. SCC (NIG.) LTD (supra) was fastened, is almost in pari materia with Section 290(1) of the 1999 Constitution. The only difference is the addition of the words 31