consideration of the foregoing, it’s the humble view of this court that an attack on one’s head with a cutlass as done by the deceased against the defendant without any just cause, would no doubt cause in the accused or defendant, a sudden and temporary loss of self – control that can render the defendant subject to passion as to make him for the moment not master of his mind. In view of all the foregoing, it is my humbly view that the defendant has successfully availed himself of the defence of provocation as he has satisfied the Trinitarian elements of the defence conjunctively. I therefore hold that the defendant caused the death of the deceased Ahmad Abubakar due to the deceased person’s sudden act of provocation which caused in the defendant a sudden and temporary loss of control, rendering the defendant subject to passion as to make him for the moment not master of his mind and before the passion abate. It is trite law that provocation as a defence, has been recognized as a basis that do provide extenuating circumstances that can reduce the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death, to culpable homicide not punishable with death. - Ndubuisi V. State (Supra) Per Eko JSC at 28 para 25. Page 30 of 34