|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| April 1995 |
|
|
Injuries during robbery are evidential to the robbery; identification by known victims upheld convictions; sentence reduced to 15 years.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – injuries inflicted during robbery are evidential and cannot form a separate grievous-harm count; identification evidence – caution required but reliable where victims previously knew accused and had adequate opportunity to observe; alibi – afterthoughts are weak; appellate reduction of illegal sentence to 15 years.
|
28 April 1995 |
|
A voluntary, corroborated confession can sustain conviction, but implicatory confessions need independent corroboration to convict co-accused.
Criminal law – confession – extra-judicial (cautioned) statement – voluntariness and trustworthiness as tests for admissibility and reliance. Criminal law – accomplice/confessional evidence – where one accused’s confession implicates co-accused, independent corroboration is required to convict the co-accused safely. Criminal procedure – accused’s right to call defence witnesses – trial court’s duty under statutory provisions to consider adjournment or process to secure material defence witnesses; omission does not automatically quash conviction but is a relevant fairness consideration. Appeal – sufficiency of evidence – possession and recovery of stolen property may corroborate a confession and sustain conviction.
|
28 April 1995 |
|
A withdrawing appellant may be allowed to withdraw an appeal, but must pay costs if the opposing party incurred expenses responding to it.
Civil procedure – Withdrawal of suit or appeal – Permissibility of withdrawal after filing – Effect of cross-appeal or counter-claim – Costs where adverse party incurred costs in response to withdrawn appeal.
|
27 April 1995 |
|
Appellant failed to overturn concurrent factual findings on ownership and trespass; appeal dismissed with costs.
Civil appeal – concurrent findings of fact – appellate court’s reluctance to disturb well-founded factual findings – trespass to land/animal damage to crops – dismissal with costs.
|
25 April 1995 |
|
|
25 April 1995 |
|
|
24 April 1995 |
|
|
24 April 1995 |
|
Prior village land allocation prevails over a later allocation; non-cultivation and lack of receipt do not amount to abandonment.
Land law – village land allocation – double allocation by village authority – effect of prior grant versus later grant; non-production of village receipt; non-cultivation versus abandonment; improvements by later grantee; compensation offered by village government.
|
24 April 1995 |
|
Prior village allocation prevails over later allocation; receipt and later cultivation do not defeat the earlier grantee’s title.
Land law – double allocation by village authority – priority of prior grant over later grant. Evidence – allocation receipt immaterial where village admits prior allocation. Possession – cultivation by later grantee not proof of superior title nor proof of abandonment by prior grantee. Remedies – village offer of compensation and alternative land relevant to dispute resolution.
|
24 April 1995 |
|
A bona fide claim of right and factual uncertainty can negate malice, making property disputes a civil, not criminal, matter.
Criminal law – Malicious damage to property – Elements of malice and requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt. Defence – Bona fide claim of right to property as a defence to offences against property. Civil v criminal remedy – Disputes over ownership/entitlement to harvested trees are generally matters for civil proceedings, not criminal prosecution.
|
24 April 1995 |
|
|
24 April 1995 |
|
|
23 April 1995 |
|
Applicant failed to show good cause to file an appeal out of time; medical evidence was irrelevant and application dismissed.
Civil procedure – appeal period and extension of time – 30‑day statutory appeal period – payment of filing fees after expiry – hospitalisation evidence must cover the appeal period to excuse delay – failure to establish good cause to file out of time results in dismissal.
|
21 April 1995 |
|
Possession of multiple identifiable stolen items sixty days post-burglary permitted inference of guilt; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – recent possession doctrine – sufficiency of delay (sixty days) to infer guilt; identification of stolen property; untraced alleged seller; assessment of accused’s explanation.
|
20 April 1995 |
|
Appellant's defilement conviction upheld; sentence increased to 15 years; later harsher law not retrospective.
Criminal law – Defilement of a female under 14 – Credibility of child complainant; corroboration by medical report; admissibility of caution statement; sentencing – non‑retroactivity of harsher statutory minimum; enhancement of sentence.
|
19 April 1995 |
|
Unexplained delay and absence of any arguable legal point justify refusal of leave to appeal out of time.
Criminal procedure – application for leave to appeal out of time – unexplained delay – prisoner’s inability to pay and alleged failure of prison officers to process papers – not satisfactory – no arguable point of law where conviction supported by confession and straightforward evidence – leave refused.
|
13 April 1995 |
|
Conviction for grievous harm upheld; sentence reduced to time served due to lack of medical evidence and time spent in custody.
Criminal law – grievous harm – appeal against conviction and sentence – appellate court defers to trial court on credibility and findings of fact; sentence reduced where record lacks evidence of injury seriousness and time served considered sufficient.
|
13 April 1995 |
|
Conviction for grievous harm upheld; sentence reduced as excessive and appellant released immediately.
Criminal law – grievous harm – appeal against conviction – deference to trial court on credibility and findings of fact; Sentence review – excessive sentence where medical evidence (PF3) absent – reduction to time served.
|
13 April 1995 |
|
A conviction based on an equivocal plea of guilty is unsafe and must be quashed; retrial may be ordered with credit for time served.
Criminal procedure – plea of guilty – acceptance of plea – plea must be unequivocal before conviction – conviction entered on equivocal plea quashed – retrial permitted – credit for time served.
|
13 April 1995 |
|
Where timing of thefts was uncertain recent-possession presumption failed, but possession plus concealment supported convictions for receiving stolen property.
Criminal law – possession of stolen property – Doctrine of recent possession – temporal certainty required for presumption to arise.* Criminal law – receiving stolen property – circumstances (possession, concealment, conduct when police searching) may justify inference of knowledge.
|
13 April 1995 |
|
Appeal allowed where prosecution relied on a suspect witness and no evidence sufficiently linked the appellant to the breaking and theft.
Criminal law – conviction – breaking and stealing (s.296(1) Penal Code); sufficiency of evidence; reliance on testimony of a witness who was also a suspect; unsafe conviction; appeal and quashing of conviction.
|
13 April 1995 |
|
Conviction based on unproduced, out-of-court identification of alleged stolen property was unsafe and quashed.
Criminal law – identification of alleged stolen property – necessity for production/inspection and in‑court identification; Evidence – possession and provenance – out‑of‑court identification alone may be speculative and insufficient to support conviction; Appellate review – unsafe conviction to be quashed.
|
13 April 1995 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Role of Assessors in Primary Courts - Assessors to he consulted by Magistrate and there is no summing up q to assessors - Magistrates Courts (Primary Courts) (Judgment of Court) Rule 1987, GN No 2 of 1988. |
13 April 1995 |
|
Conviction based solely on contradictory, possibly coerced testimony of a co-accused is unsafe and was quashed.
Criminal law – Evidence – Conviction based on uncorroborated testimony of a co-accused – Allegations of torture and contradictory statements – Necessity of corroboration for safe conviction.
|
13 April 1995 |
|
|
12 April 1995 |
|
Appellate court upheld robbery conviction but reduced illegal thirty-year district court sentence to fifteen years.
Criminal law – Robbery – Conviction based on identification and circumstantial evidence – possession of stolen property shortly after theft and flight as corroboration. Sentencing – Excessive/illegal sentence – district court's maximum for simple robbery under Act 10/89 – reduction from thirty to fifteen years.
|
12 April 1995 |
|
Conviction for receiving stolen property upheld on circumstantial evidence and voluntary caution statement; five-year minimum sentence affirmed.
Criminal law – Receiving/retaining stolen property – Circumstantial evidence implicating recipient – Admissibility and voluntariness of caution statement – Credibility of accused’s changing accounts – Minimum sentence under s.5(6) Minimum Sentences Act 1972.
|
11 April 1995 |
|
A conviction relying solely on a child witness admitted without voir dire is unsafe; convictions quashed and appellant released.
Criminal procedure – Evidence Act s.127(2) – Child of tender years – Requirement for voir dire to establish understanding of oath and sufficient intelligence – Competence of child witness – Evidence inadmissible where voir dire absent – Conviction unsafe if sole basis is incompetent child’s testimony.
|
10 April 1995 |
|
|
7 April 1995 |
|
Appellant's long possession and credible evidence established ownership; district court wrongly reversed primary court's finding.
Land law – title by long possession and cultivation – short interruptions for accepted reasons do not defeat possessory claim; absence of evidence of inheritance defeats claim to ancestral land; appellate court should not overturn primary court's credibility findings without good reason.
|
7 April 1995 |
|
An uncontradicted, reasonable explanation for counsel’s absence can justify reinstating an appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
Civil procedure – reinstatement of appeal dismissed for want of prosecution – sufficiency of explanation for counsel’s non-appearance – weight of uncontradicted evidence – discretion of trial court in refusing reinstatement.
|
6 April 1995 |
|
The High Court upheld lower courts' acceptance of oral evidence and dismissed the appeal in a partnership dispute over cattle proceeds.
Commercial/partnership dispute – butchery business – accounting for proceeds of sale of cattle and skins; Evidence – oral testimony and witness credibility – concurrent findings of fact; Appeal – standard of review of findings based on oral evidence; Documentary evidence – absence of records affects allocation of entitlements.
|
6 April 1995 |
|
Appellate court upheld concurrent credibility findings and dismissed appeal in an undocumented partnership accounting dispute.
Partnership dispute – informal butchery partnership – accounting for cattle and proceeds – evidentiary reliance on third‑party witness (PW3). Evidence – credibility assessments – concurrent findings of fact upheld unless manifestly unreasonable. Civil appeal – appellate restraint in overturning factual findings based on witness testimony. Business records – absence of documentation undermines party’s case and elevates importance of credible oral evidence.
|
6 April 1995 |
|
Appeal against cattle-theft conviction dismissed; identification, admissions and flight supported conviction and five-year sentence.
Criminal law – Theft of cattle – Identification evidence including distinctive marks – Weight of admissions and flight in proving participation – Appellate review of trial court’s credibility findings.
|
5 April 1995 |