entirety, discharge and acquit the Defendant as the prosecution has not proved any of the ingredients of the offence against the Defendant as charged. On the part of the court after a careful consideration of the testimonies f the prosecution witnesses and the defence witness, the processes filed and submission of learned counsel on both sides, I am in one with the prosecution counsel that the sole issue that calls for determination is whether the prosecution has proved the essential ingredients/elements of the offence alleged against the Defendant beyond reasonable doubt to warrant his being found guilty and consequently convicted? It is trite law that the burden placed on the shoulders of the prosecution is to prove the guilt of the Defendant beyond reasonable doubt. See Section 135 and 138 Evidence Act, Case of BAKARE v STATE (1987) 1 NWLR (Pt 52) 578. It is not in doubt that the offences upon which the Defence is brought against the Defendant were all brought pursuant to the provisions of Section 17(a) and (c) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000. 35