“Issue of retrial in Criminal trials is an interesting subject and I get tempted to comment even where I am supposed to say I agree and drop my pen. Even where the Appellant has already spent some time in prison custody, the general sympathy would be that let him go home rather than be subjected to another round of trial, some advocates even resort to misquoting the constitution that so doing will amount to double jeopardy, this is far from it, I am convinced that the society and the victim also deserve justice and in ensuring that justice is done the accused must be subjected to another round of trial especially where the evidence against him is overwhelming and the offence charged is not trivial. The length of time spent in custody is of no moment so long as the Court is convinced that putting him to another trial is not oppressive. I read the entire evidence generated at the trial against the Appellant, and it also appears to me that the alleged offences are not trivial, and the fact that the Appellant had been in custody before the order of retrial is no longer a consideration against making an order for a fresh trial, while it is correct that there was glaring irregularity in the trial, leaving the irregularity aside, the evidence against the Appellant cannot be brushed aside with a wave of hand, in other words from the materials on records and the gravity of the allegation against the Appellant it will be proper to subject the Appellant to a fresh trial before the appropriate Court.” Per ADAMU JAURO, JSC in JEREMIAH JOSEPH V. THE STATE (2022-LCER-46642-SC) at Pp. 34 – 35; Paras. B-F.