doubt against the defendant in respect of all the offences alleged against him.” The case of the prosecution against the defendants, is as presented by the evidence of the 4 prosecution witnesses and the exhibits tendered and admitted. Similarly, the defence of the defendant is as presented by the evidence of the 1 one witness who happened to be the defendant and the exhibits tendered and admitted through the prosecution witnesses. The facts upon which the charges against the defendant were framed, are as contained in the 4 counts charges captured by the amended charge sheet. The defence counsel in their adopted written address submitted that by the offence of theft, dishonest intention on the part of the defendant must be proved and to the hilt that it was the defendant who committed the theft, and these elements according to the defence counsel, has not been proved by the prosecution. He further argued that PWs 1-3 are all official witnesses who were not present when the alleged offence of theft took place and so their evidence is hearsay and inadmissible. - Obed V. Stat {2014} LPELR 23123 He argued that the AK47 riffle with a rounds of live ammunition said to have been stolen from the Nigerian Custom Duty Post at Gaido village of Illela LGA of Sokoto State has not been tendered before this court, and there is no any evidence before the court showing that it was Page 3 of 18