be guided by this decision. On the issue that the statement was recorded based on interview and not based on question and answer session, we submit that this line of argument is not born out of the evidence of PW. Prosecuting counsel cannot give evidence from the Bar and the duty of counsel is to assist the court to arrive at a just decision of the case. See Agoro V. Aromolaran & Anor (2011) LPELR 990. On the whole we urge the court to reject the statement sought to be tendered. Court: This matter is hereby adjourned to 29/9/2022 for Ruling and continuation of hearing of the evidence of PW3. Bail of the defendant to continue. Signed Hon. Justice Mohammed Mohammed (Judge) 25/8/2022 Court resumed today 14/10/2022 Appearances: Chioma Okangwu Esq. and Habila Jonathan Esq. for the prosecution. Shamsu A. Dauda Esq. for the defendant. Chioma Okangwu Esq: The matter is for ruling. Court: Court: Ruling On the 25/8/2022 the prosecution counsel sought to tender the statement of the defendant through PW3 one Detective Akpan Okun, but the defence counsel objected to the admissibility of the statement sought to be tendered in evidence on the following grounds:(i) That the document sought to be tendered does not bear the name of the defendant when compared with the name of the defendant on the charge sheet; Page 26 of 43