10-15 times also that as regards to the oral testimony of PW4 and PW5 there is no any discrepancy or contradiction in their evidence as reproduced in the submission of the defence in paragraph 3:19 to 3:21 learned DPP further submitted that the PW4 and PW5 informed the court that Exhibit C and D are in compete that there are many things which they have to the court that they were not captured in Exhibit C and Din addition to what is written therein and the court to hold that there is no any contradiction or discrepancy in the evidence of PW4 and PW5 and treat their evidences as reliable and convict the defendant. On the issue of failure to call medical doctor it is the submission of the learned DPP that there is no need for Exhibit A and B to be tender by the maker. Since the maker of the document Exhibit A and B is on study leave out of jurisdiction and his attendance cannot be secured, his team member appeared in court and informed the court that they work in team and he is part of the team that examine PW4 and PW5 and issued the certificate only that he is not the doctor that signed the report and that defence dispense with the attendance of the doctor and closed his case. Learned DPP submitted that Exhibit A and B are well explanatory from the wording therein Nana Khadija centre is a joint ownership with Government of sokoto state it is manage by sokoto state doctors who have specialty and requisite training in that field and finally urged the court discontinuance with the submission of the defence counsel for lacking in merit and convict the defendant accordingly. Let me start by saying that it is trite law that in criminal proceedings the law placed the burden or responsibility of proving the guilt of the Page 9 of 23