"It is an established fact of nature that some people may by reason of their stature or physical conditions or economic or social circumstances, look older or younger than their registry age. It is particularly, so when such people engage in physical or mental activities that give one the impression that they are of 'age'. The evidence in this case of the prosecutrix fits into this category and the question is whether appellant has reason, having regards to his antecedents with the prosecutrix to believe that she is of age - more particularly that she is above 18 years. It is factual scenario such as this that necessitated the inclusion of Section 32 (4) into the Child Rights Law of Ogun State which provides thus: "Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, it shall be a defence to prove the appellant believed on reasonable grounds that the child was of the age of eighteen years or above." Evidence in the case reveal some fiduciary relationship between the appellant and the prosecutix in the sense that appellant was a teacher of the Prosecutrix PW1 and by reason thereof was able to exercise undue influence over the girl. For a teacher to begin to have affairs with his JSS3 student over a period without involving the parents of the girl smacks more of taking undue advantage of the girl in a Pupil/Teacher relationship. The undue influence seems to me to negate the provision of Section 32(4) and so the appellant cannot reasonably believe the prosecutrix to be 18 years or above. By reason of the undue influence appellant exercised over the girl, the defence of Section 32 (4) cannot avail the appellant." Per OKORONKWO, J.C.A. (Pp. 18-20, Paras. E-A) (...read in context) 5. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE - OFFENCE OF RAPE: Whether in an offence of rape a child who is under the age of 14 years is capable of giving consent