In order therefore to secure the conviction of an accused person for the offence of Armed Robbery, the prosecution must satisfy the above requirements of the ingredients beyond reasonable doubt. Where this is not done, the case must fail. - Osuagwu V. State (2016) LPELR 40836. - Afolalu V. State (2010) 16 WRN pt 1220 p 584. - State V. Isiaku (2013) LPELR 20521. In the case of Oyeyemi V. State (Supra) at page 90 paragraph 45 in defining what constitute Armed Robbery, Court of Appeal has this to say:“A robbery is said to be armed robbery when the robbery is committed by a person carrying a dangerous weapon or when the thief is accompanied by another person carrying a dangerous weapon.” - Bello V. State (2007) 10 WRN p. 564. - Osetola V. State (2012)17 NWLR pt 1329 p. 343. - Adekoya V. State (2017) 18 WRN 1. My Lord Abdullahi JCA in the said Oyeyemi’s Case (Supra) at page 91 paragraphs 15 clarified the position of the law as follows:“The law is that it is not the requirement of the law that all the accused persons must be armed with dangerous weapon, the offence is complete once an offensive weapon is used by either of the accused persons.” As to the 1st element, PW1 (Alhaji Umar Garba) during his examination-in-chief, testified as follows:Page 10 of 21