The learned counsel to the Appellant submitted that, the trial Judge erred in law when he admitted and relied on the hearsay evidence of PW3 - Investigating Police Officer and Exhibit B tendered by PW2 - ACR to convict the Appellant. Counsel drew the court's attention to the fact that PW3 Investigating Police Officer only gave hearsay evidence of what happened as regards the crime. Exhibit B was the evidence taken by A. E. Archibong J. which is hearsay of what happened in the 1st court. Exhibit B is inadmissible because it did not conform strictly to the provisions of Section 295 (1) and (3) of the criminal procedure Law Cap 39 Laws of Akwa Ibom State, 2000 which provides. Section 295 (1). The court shall in every case take notes in writing of the oral evidence, or so much thereof as it considers is material, in a book to be kept for that purpose and such book shall be signed by the judge or magistrate at the conclusion of each day's proceeding. Section 295 (3) The record so kept as aforesaid or a copy thereof purporting to be signed and certified as a true copy by the judge or magistrate shall at all times, without further proof, be admitted as evidence of such proceedings and of the statements made by the witnesses. These sections provide that the proceedings must be signed by the Judge the same day it was taken and must be certified by the Judge that took the evidence. In this case while the Judge took the evidence of Blessing Peter Asuquo on the 29th of July, 2004 he signed it on the 27th of July, 2005 while the witness was cross examination on the 14th of February, 2005, the Judge signed the evidence proceedings on the 14th of February, 2006. There is no indication that the Judge actually certified Exhibit B. counsel also stated that Exhibit B was a doctored version of what really transpired in the 1st court. Counsel submitted that the non-compliance with S.295 (1) and (3) of the criminal Procedure Law makes Exhibit B inadmissible. Counsel urged the court to hold that Exhibit B is inadmissible and wrongly admitted. See Ipinlaiye Vs. Olukotun (1996) 6 NWLR pt. 453 page 148 where the Supreme court held: That a court has power to expunge from its record inadmissible evidence irrespective of the fact that it was not objected to at the point of tendering. Having now been convinced that the Exhibit B was wrongly admitted, we submit that this Appellate Court has power to expunge Exhibit B which is inadmissible from the records.