Further, in exhibit 11, the 1st Defendant also stated: “The site plan is a pre-requisite towards obtaining Certificate of Occupancy. It is my prayer here to request the surveyors to conclude the survey to enable us obtain Certificate of Occupancy, please.” The admission of the interest of the 1st Defendant in Plot SS1 Jikwoyi Extension III also supports the evidence of the prosecution witness PW2 to the effect that the 1st Defendant brought to her title documents of Plot SS1 Jikwoyi Extension III for charting. And by her evidence i.e. PW2, she testified that Plot SS1 Jikwoyi Extension III had already been charted in favour of Fine Trust Academy as per exhibits earlier referred to in this judgment. However, despite the clear evidence available to the 1st Defendant that Plot SS1 had been charted, because of the interest inherent by the 1st Defendant in the said Plot, used his office to confer unfair advantage to himself and his relations or associates as revealed by his statement, exhibit 11, as well as exhibits 9 and 10. Thus, therefore, I hold the view that the Prosecution has proved the ingredients of the offence under Section 19 of the Act beyond reasonable doubt against the 1st Defendant and I so hold. Accordingly, the 1st Defendant is hereby convicted of the offence. On the final count which relates to the 1st Defendant contrary to section 363 of the Penal Code, to proof the offence against the 1st Defendant, the prosecution submitted that the following ingredients must be established:(i) That the Accused made, signed, sealed or executed the document in question or any part thereof; (ii) With intent to cause any person to part with property or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed. (iii) That the Accused made the documents dishonestly. The learned Counsel for the 1st Defendant also at paragraph 4.21 of the final written address cited the case of ONTA RIO OIL & GAS NIGERIA LTD V FRN (supra) relying on the case of ODIAWA V FRN (supra) and ALAKE V THE STATE 55