considered as a statement made in the course of judicial police investigations. However the document tendered by the prosecution under Section 336(b) of the C.P.C was a ninepage report from the Central Police Station, Buea. The report which was tendered by the prosecution consisted of the following: a two-page report by the Commissioner of the Central Police Station Buea, to the State Counsel of Buea; a complaint addressed by one Feh Felix Ntungwen to the Commissioner of the Central Police Station, Buea entitled “a complaint about my younger sister’s irregularity at home (Tanyi Goodness); a witness statement recorded from Feh ntungwen and Tanyi Goodness, a cautionary statement from the accused, a birth certificate and extract of a hospital book. If we consider the provisions of Section 336(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code some components of exhibit “A” were wrongly admitted through inadvertence since a report addressed by the Commissioner to the State Counsel as well as a complaint addressed to the Commissioner by a member of the public do not constitute the statements referred to in Section 336(b) of the C.P.C. In the circumstances, the components of Exhibit “A” which were improperly admitted in evidence during the trial, that is, the commissioner’s report, the complaint filed by the complainant to the commissioner, the birth certificate of the victim and the extract from the hospital book cannot be considered as statements made in the course of judicial police investigations and are hereby expunged from the records of this case. Consequently, the court shall not act on them. The court will act on the parts of Exhibit “A” which were properly admitted in evidence that is the two witnesses’ statements from Feh Ntungwen and Tanyi Goodness and the cautionary statement recorded from the accused by the police. As concerns Exhibit “B”, the statement of the accused during preliminary inquiry, it was received in evidence under section 336(a) of the C.P.C which reads: “Any statement made in the course of judicial proceeding by a person who cannot be heard at subsequent proceedings either because he is deceased or because of insufficient time to get him to appear before the court, the excessive expenditure involved or the impossibility of finding him”. In the instant case, the prosecution did not give any reasons why they were tendering the statement of the accused recorded during preliminary inquiry. Exhibit “B” was wrongly admitted through inadvertence and it is the duty of the court to reject it and expunge it from the records of the case. After rejecting Exhibit “B”, the only legal evidence adduced by the prosecution on which the court can act is the part of Exhibit “A” which consist of the handwritten statements of the complainants, Feh Ntungwen, and that of the victim of the offences, Tanyi Goodness as well as the cautionary stement recorded from the accused person by the police. Amongst the three statements which constitute part of Exhibit “A”, the most damaging to the case for the defense is the statement recorded from the accused under caution by the police, wherein he admitted he knew that the victim of the offences, that is, Tanyi Goodness was 13 years of age and she was his girlfriend. In fact he stated therein that he had sexual intercourse with her. With regard to the offence of indecency to a child contrary to Section 346(3) of the Penal Code with which the accused is tried in count one, there is cogent and compellable evidence to convince anyone that there is no rational basis other than indecency to a child can the facts of this case be accounted for. In fact, in his cautioned statement to the police