Furthermore in LAMIDI v. STATE (2016) LPELR-41320(CA), the Court of Appeal had occasion to pronounce on the purpose of exhibit in the case of Buba v. State (1992) 1 NWLR (Pt. 215) 1 at 17, per Makhtar, JCA, thus: “Exhibits are not tendered and admitted in Court for the fun of it, they are for a purpose albeit to assist in determining the relevance of the exhibits to the case. Secondly, once they form part of the record they must be examined, scrutinized and assessed for just determination of the case.” See also, Ayinde v. Salawu (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 109) 297 at 314 at 314-315 and R V. Ukpong (1961) 1 ALL NLR 25.” Per DANJUMA, J.C.A. (Pp. 47-48, Paras. E-B).
EXHIBITS ADMITTED AND MARKED CAN BE USED
The law is most elementary that a court of law is most competent to make use of exhibits admitted and marked.
— Tobi, JCA. Abraham v Olorunfunmi (1990) – CA/L/83/89