discharge and acquittal. See BELLO VS THE STATE (2012) 8 NWLR (PT. 1302) 207, 237; UTUK VS THE STATE (2010) 34 NWLR 171 AT 179; HARUNA VS A.G. (2012) 9 NWLR (PT. 1306) 419, 444 - 445 PARA G. Act of gross indecency has not been defined by the Penal Code but the Blacks Law Dictionary 7th Edition at page 771 defines indecency as "the condition or state of being outrageously offensive especially in a vulgar or sexual way. Indecent assault involves sexual assault". Indecent assault is an offence of aggravated assault and overlaps with sexual assault. It follows that an act of gross indecency denotes an aggravated assault that is grossly or grievously offensive in a vulgar or sexual way. It is an unlawful and unacceptable sexual activity or behaviour forced upon another person against his or her will or consent and includes the act of inserting one's hand or finger in the vagina of the other without that other's consent or against her will. In other words, act of gross indecency includes any unlawful sexual activity or behaviour short of penetration of the penis." Per WAMBAI, J.C.A. (Pp. 12-15, Paras. F-B) (...read in context) 9. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE - OFFENCE(S): Position of the law on proof of consent in the offence of gross indecency "On the remaining ingredient, a read through the Section makes it unarguable clear that the subsequent ingredients of the offence after the preceding ingredient of the grossly indecent act, are disjunctive and not conjunctive. In other words, the succeeding ingredients of absence of consent, use of force or threats are in the alternative and not conjunctive as the connecting word used is "or" and not "and". The prove of any one of the listed ingredients of the offence if co-exists with the preceding ingredient of grossly indecent act, completes the offence. The Section (285) provides: - "Without his (the other person's) consent "or" by use of force "or" threats compels a person to join within him in the commission of such act". Thus, to succeed, the prosecution needs not prove all the 3 variables that the other person did not consent to the act, that the accused forced the other person, and compelled the other by threats to join in the commission of the offence. It is sufficient if the prosecution proves either, (a) that the other person did not consent to the act "or" (b) that the accused person by use of force or threats compelled the other person to join him in the commission of the offence. As to what constitutes consent or when the other person will be said to have given his consent resort must be had to the proviso which provides: Provided that a consent given by a person below the age of sixteen years to such an act when done by his teacher, guardian or any person entrusted with his care or education shall