"It is not difficult for me to agree with the learned Counsel for the Respondent that the Appellant's Counsel by his Issue Two seems to mix up the procedural requirements of a full trial as for example a trial by information with that of a summary trial. Undoubtedly, the Provision of Section 308 of the ACJA, 2015 applies only to a full trial or a trial by information and not summary trial. In Section 494, the interpretation Section of the ACJA, 2015 "summary trial" means any trial by a Magistrate or a trial by a High Court commenced without filing an information. The procedure where as in the instant case, the accused has pleaded guilty to the charge is governed by the Provision of Section 274(1), (2) and Section 356(2) of the ACJA, 2015 By Section 274(1) - "Where a Defendant pleads guilty to an offence with which he is charged the Court shall: a) Record his plea as nearly as possible. b) Invite the prosecution to state the fact of the case, and c) Enquire from the defendant whether his plea of guilty is to the fact as stated by the prosecution. (2) Where the Court is satisfied that the defendant intends to admit the truth of all the essential elements of the offence for which he has pleaded guilty, the Court shall convict and sentence him or make such order as may be necessary, unless there shall appear sufficient reason to the contrary. Section 356 (2) of the ACJA 2015 which more specifically is under "Summary Trials" says: "Where the defendant pleads guilty and the Court is satisfied that he intends to admit the offence and shows no cause or no sufficient cause why sentence should not be passed, the Court shall proceed to sentence" In the instant case, a careful study of the Record of proceedings reveals a play out of the dynamics of the Provision of Section 274 and 356 (2) of the ACJA 2015. The Appellant took his plea and pleaded guilty to the charge on Page 27 of the Record of Appeal. The case was then adjourned for presentation of facts by the prosecution. PW1 (Ahmed Akopari Suleiman) DSN and Command Exhibit Keeper of the NDLEA started given evidence on Page 32 of the Record of Appeal and from Pages 32 to 35 of the Record of Appeal settled with the preliminaries by tendering Exhibits A, B, and C. The proceedings continued on Page 35 of the Record of Appeal and at Page 36, of the Record, the learned trial Judge recorded conviction for the Appellant/Accused. The relevant portions of the proceedings at Pages 35 to 36 of the Record of Appeal are reproduced below: PW1: the brown sealed envelop (sic) has the same reference number as Exhibit C. identifies brown envelop. Seeks to tender. Salaudeen Esq.: No objection. Court: Brown sealed envelop (sic) is admitted in evidence and marked Exhibit D. PW1: Applies that Exhibit D be opened to ascertain its contents. Salaudeen Esq.: No objection. Court: Granted. PW1: Opens exhibit D. Brings out evidence pouch. Exhibit D contains the transparent evidence pouch I took to Lagos. Seeks to tender. Salaudeen Esq.: No objection. Court: Transparent evidence pouch is admitted in evidence and marked Exhibit E. PW1: The drug analysis report has the same reference number with Exhibits C, D, and E. Identifies drug analysis report. Seeks to tender. Salaudeen Esq.: No objection. Court: Drug analysis report is admitted in evidence and marked EXHIBIT F. PW1: Shown document. This is the statement of the Defendant. Seeks to tender. Salaudeen Esq.: No objection. Court: The statement of Defendant recorded in English Language is admitted in evidence and marked Exhibit G. PW1: Shown bags. These are the bags. They are in loose form i.e. the Cannabis. Seeks to tender 34KG of Cannabis. Court: 4 White sacks containing 34KG of Cannabis sativa are admitted in evidence and marked Exhibits H1 to H4. PW1: That is all. Salaudeen Esq.: No cross - examination. Court: Witness is discharged. Adeleye (Mrs.): Urges Court to convict as per plea, facts and evidence before the Court. Salaudeen Esq.: No objection. Court: The accused person is convicted as charged. Thereafter, learned Counsel for the Appellant Accused proceeded to Allocutus on Page 37 of the Record and the learned trial Judge pronounced sentence on the Appellant on Page 38 of the Record. ?Strictly speaking there is no special procedure for the evaluation of evidence in summary trials as in the instance case where the Appellant Accused pleaded guilty. The simple reason for that is that there is in fact no evidence to evaluate. The plea of guilty as in the instant case is the most sacrosanct form of proof in Criminal procedure followed closely and perhaps relatedly by a confessional statement of an accused person. See: USMAN BABAGINDA VS. F.R.N. (Unreported CA/IL/C.43 of 5th of May, 2017/2016). This is the reason why the numerous cases on the need to evaluate evidence and or give reasons for a Judgment cited by the learned Counsel for the Appellant are simply not applicable and irrelevant in the instant case which deals with plea of guilty and a summary trial procedure under the Provision of Section 274 and 356 (2) of the ACJA 2015 and not under the Provision of Section 308 of the ACJA as imagined or contemplated by the learned Counsel for the Appellant. ?In conclusion on Issue Two, I agree with the learned Counsel for the Respondent that Section 308 of the ACJA, 2015 is not applicable to the Appellant's case, hence the trial Judge was under no obligation to comply with Section 308 ACJA because the Appellant's case at the Court below was a summary trial and he pleaded guilty to the charge."

Per OWOADE, J.C.A. in MONDAY EMMANUEL v. THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2018) LPELR-44856(CA)