the Court as representing the true State of Affairs. See the Dictum of OGUNBIYI JSC in the Case of GOYANG KAYILI VS ESLY YILBUK & 2 ORS (2015) LPELR-24323(SC) where His Lordship enjoined the Court to act on unchallenged evidence. See also the case of ESENE VS STATE (2017) LPELR – 41912 (SC) Mr. Wubon had acknowledged the Memo raised by him inExhibit Q and upon being told that the main reason for the Funds was to procure Security Equipment, he had made up the justification for the Purchase of Grains “as convincingly as he could” to be that the Purchase was necessary to cushion the effect of the escalating food items for the people of Taraba State. So, in other words, the Author of the Memo that requested for Grains, and obtained Money in regard to Grains, KNEW from the Start that no Grains were intended to be purchased. The Instructors, i.e., the Chief Detail and the Defendant, also KNEW that no Grains were to be bought. When questioned as to why he raised the Memo for foodstuff, he answered that he was complying with an Executive Directive but did not link up or make any enquiries with the Ministry of Agriculture, who were to keep Records of Purchase of Agricultural Products. If the Ministry of Agriculture had an Approval for the Purchase of Grains, they would have had to retire the Funds. Mr. Japheth Wubon did not witness the delivery of the sum of Twenty Four Million, Three Hundred Thousand Naira (N24, 300, 000) by the Accountant to the Liaison Office to the Defendant and was only orally informed by the Accountant. Further, Mr. Japheth Wubon categorically stated that he did not receive the delivery of the Goods of Grains at the Liaison Office of Taraba State and neither were the Funds RETIRED. This is fundamental, as it is clear that all Government Expenditure must be retired. 156