counsel further that PW4 and PW5 were caution by the court and they gave answers to the satisfaction of the court also there is no requirement for corroboration in rape cases, however, the provision of the penal code law of sokoto state 2019, and the violence against persons (prohibition law) of sokoto state 2021. Under which the defendant is charged, they both provide that corroboration shall be immaterial when trying the offence of rape. Learned DPP submitted that Exhibit A and B, the medical report of PW4 and PW5 serves as corroborative evidence to the evidence of PW4 and PW5 and the medical report reveals or prove there was penetration learned DPP referred the court to the case of CPC ISAH AHMED V. THE NIGERIAN ARMY {supra} and also urged the court to hold that corroboration is immaterial in rape cases under the laws of Sokoto state. Under which the defendant was charged and corroboration is desired to some extent, exhibit A and B the medical report of PW4 and PW5 has corroborated the unsworn evidence of PW4 and PW5 Learned counsel further submitted that PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW6 there evidence is not hearsay as they all state the specific role they played pertaining what they did in the case, therefore there evidence are relevant and are exceptions to the hearsay role and urged the court to so hold. On the issue of discrepancy or contradiction in the evidence of PW4 and PW5 their oral evidence and extra judicial statement (Exhibit C and D) they both stated that the defendant use to call them whenever they are sent either to buy recharge cards or something else. Put them in his room and insert fingers into their vagina that he did that about Page 8 of 23