The trial Court's judgment spans over pages 48 - 75 of the record and at page 74 this is what his Lordship said:"In the end I am quite satisfied that the prosecution has proved the offence of rape under Section 283 of the Penal Code against the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. The accused Shuaibu Isa is hereby convicted as charged." The Lower Court, while endorsing the view held by the trial Court had this to say also:-''I have gone through the entire record and could not find where the learned trial judge made use of this question and answer. Learned counsel for the appellant also failed to pin point where it was put into use in convicting the appellant..." I have no reason to depart from the erudite conclusion arrived thereat by the Lower Court. In other words, the learned counsel for the respondent had rightly submitted that, contrary to the assertion by the appellant, the answer to the question posed by the trial Judge was not different from what the witness Pw1 said in her evidence in chief, which clearly pointed to the fact that it was the insertion of the penis by the appellant into her vagina that caused her to shout. Therefore, the question and answer did not occasion any miscarriage of justice as wrongly conceived by the appellant's counsel. In other words, it did not add any value to the prosecution case as rightly pointed out by the Lower Court. I wish to state in passing however that the error of interjection after crossexamination which, the Lower Court ascribed to the trial Court was as to the procedure adopted which did not affect the substance and justice of the case