|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1978 |
|
|
The Primary Court’s factual finding that the appellant owned the land was upheld; appeal allowed with costs.
* Land law – ownership dispute – evaluation of chain of title and occupation.* Appellate review – correctness of Primary Court factual findings and credibility assessments.* Possession – occupation as invitee versus acquisition of title.* Evidence – weight of witness credibility in land disputes.
|
21 December 1978 |
| November 1978 |
|
|
Absence of evidence of actual taking means account shortage does not prove theft; conviction substituted for negligent occasioning of loss and sentence reduced.
Criminal law — Theft by public servant — Accounting shortage insufficient for theft where no evidence of actual taking; hearsay inadmissible — Conviction substituted for occasioning loss by negligence (s.264(1)) — Sentencing error where Minimum Sentences Act applied without evidential basis — Order to refund set aside.
|
23 November 1978 |
|
Conviction quashed where trial court misdirected, ignored contested evidence on parking lights, and wrongly absolved the negligent oncoming driver.
Criminal law – Road Traffic – conviction for causing death by careless parking – appellate review where trial magistrate failed to decide contested allegation (parking lights), relied on uncharged matters, and shifted burden of proof – evidence pointed to negligent driving by another road user as cause of accident.
|
23 November 1978 |
|
Reckless driving conviction and sentence upheld; three-year disqualification quashed for failure to ask accused to show cause.
* Traffic law – reckless driving – conviction upheld on complainant and independent eyewitness evidence – eyewitness testimony not hearsay. * Criminal procedure – right to be heard – accused given s.206 rights and had nothing material to add. * Sentencing – fine and default imprisonment – court may consider ability to pay; prompt payment indicated capacity. * Disqualification from driving – court must ask convicted driver to show cause/special reasons before ordering disqualification; failure to do so vitiates the order.
|
22 November 1978 |
|
Independent corroboration of a buyer’s ID upheld conviction and mandatory five-year sentence for cattle theft.
* Criminal law – Cattle theft – Identification evidence – Corroboration of an interested buyer’s testimony by an independent witness. * Evidence – Mistaken identity – Totality of evidence excluding mistaken identity. * Sentencing – Mandatory minimum five-year imprisonment for cattle theft.
|
22 November 1978 |
|
Conviction based on recent possession was unsafe where the court relied on items not specified in the charge-sheet; appeal allowed and release ordered.
* Criminal law – recent possession – conviction unsafe where evidence relied on items not specified in the charge-sheet. * Criminal procedure – charge-sheet requirements – accused must be given fair notice of particulars relied on by prosecution. * Burden of proof – inadmissible to shift evidential or legal burden onto accused to explain uncharged items. * Appellate review – power to quash convictions that are pervaded by such prejudice.
|
15 November 1978 |
|
Eyewitness and chemical evidence upheld a driving‑under‑influence conviction; sentence and three‑year disqualification affirmed.
* Road Traffic Act – driving under the influence – conviction based on eyewitness observations and chemical analysis of blood. * Evidentiary standard – impairment of efficiency suffices; no need to prove total loss of control. * Sentencing – appellate restraint; sentence not manifestly excessive despite being below statutory minimum. * Disqualification – mandatory cancellation under section 27 where no special reasons advanced.
|
6 November 1978 |
|
Conviction for corruption overturned where prosecution relied on a single inconsistent police witness and failed to prove inducement.
Criminal law – Corruption – Giving a bribe – Whether prosecution proved inducement under section 3(2) – Reliance on single police witness whose evidence conflicted with documentary record – Payment as security versus corrupt inducement.
|
2 November 1978 |
| August 1978 |
|
|
The court refused to disturb the applicant’s three‑year sentence for an unnatural offence, finding it within the 14‑year maximum.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence (s.154(1)) – Evidence supporting conviction for carnal knowledge of a child; Sentence – Statutory maximum 14 years – Three‑year term not excessive; Appellate interference – refused; Note on psychiatric treatment of offenders.
|
10 August 1978 |
| July 1978 |
|
|
Evidence of hidden cash and newly acquired goods was sufficient to uphold conviction and confirm a seven-year deterrent sentence.
* Criminal law – Storebreaking (s.296(1)) – Sufficiency of evidence – hidden cash and recently acquired goods as circumstantial evidence of theft; leading police to recovered property admissible and probative. * Sentencing – Deterrent sentence appropriate where substantial theft committed and only part recovered.
|
20 July 1978 |
|
Appeal dismissed: identification evidence was reliable and mistaken identity was safely excluded.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Whether mistaken identity safely excluded – Factors: prior acquaintance, lighting at scene, contemporaneous recognition and prompt pointing out to others and police.
|
3 July 1978 |
| June 1978 |
|
|
The appellate court upheld conviction and a three‑year sentence for servant stealing involving Shs.5,185 and a false report.
Criminal law – Stealing by servant (ss. 265, 271 Penal Code) – Sufficiency of evidence to sustain conviction – Sentence review – Whether three years' imprisonment was manifestly excessive given amount stolen and false reporting to employer.
|
27 June 1978 |
|
The appellant's conviction for defilement upheld on sufficient evidence; three-year sentence confirmed.
Criminal law – Defilement; sufficiency of circumstantial and medical evidence; witness credibility and corroboration; proportionality of sentence.
|
20 June 1978 |
|
The court dismissed the applicants' appeals, finding identification and eyewitness corroboration made a conviction for rape safe and sentences appropriate.
* Criminal law – Rape – Identification evidence in daylight – reliability and prior acquaintance.* Criminal law – Sexual offences – Corroboration: rule of practice, not absolute requirement; conviction without corroboration permissible if safe to do so.* Evidence – Delay in reporting – delay not necessarily fatal where independent corroboration exists.* Sentencing – Two-year imprisonment for rape – not manifestly excessive.
|
19 June 1978 |
| May 1978 |
|
|
The appellant’s substitution and unexplained possession of government trophies established theft and unlawful possession.
Criminal law – Theft by public officer – substitution of entrusted government property; Unexplained possession – inference of unlawful possession of government trophies; Sentence – whether excessive given betrayal of public trust.
|
15 May 1978 |
| April 1978 |
|
|
Appellate court upheld robbery conviction based on credible eyewitness identification and rejected unsupported alibi claims.
* Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Identification evidence – Positive eyewitness identification at night with lighting conditions supports conviction. * Criminal procedure – Alibi – Burden on accused to establish alibi; appellate court will not overturn trial credibility findings absent record support. * Appellate review – Claims not appearing in trial record (travel tickets, excluded witnesses, new allegations) cannot be entertained on appeal.
|
27 April 1978 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution failed to disprove the appellant’s alibi and prove identity beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – theft/burglary – identification and possession of stolen property – alibi – evidential burden and reasonable doubt – conviction quashed for failure to prove identity beyond reasonable doubt.
|
17 April 1978 |
|
Possession of distinctive stolen goods upheld as sufficient to infer guilt of shop‑breaking; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – shop‑breaking/burglary – identification of stolen goods – recent possession doctrine – lapse of time between theft and recovery – sufficiency of evidence to support conviction.
|
10 April 1978 |
|
Possession of identified stolen goods and arrest near hidden cache upheld the applicant's convictions and sentences.
* Criminal law – shop-breaking and stealing – identification of stolen goods; recent possession doctrine; circumstantial evidence linking accused to scene; credibility of defence that goods were purchased elsewhere.
|
10 April 1978 |
|
Appeal allowed where robbery charge was duplicitous and key eyewitness evidence was unreliable, convictions quashed.
Criminal law – sufficiency of evidence – reliance on single eyewitness – identification evidence must be clear and corroborated; Duplicity in indictment/charge – effect on conviction; Appeal – quashing convictions where primary evidence unreliable.
|
10 April 1978 |
|
Appellate court upheld conviction for stealing by a public servant where credible evidence showed non-remittance and no handover proof.
* Criminal law – stealing by a public servant – failure to remit deceased employee's salary to Paymaster-General. * Credibility of witnesses – appellate restraint – acceptance of successor's denial over accused's explanation. * Evidence – absence of handing-over/take-over documentation undermining defence. * Sentence – mandatory three-year imprisonment for offence.
|
1 April 1978 |
| March 1978 |
|
|
Area Commissioner's letter mitigates illegal transport of agricultural produce; sentence and return of produce upheld.
* Criminal law – Transport of scheduled agricultural produce – Requirement of permit under National Agricultural Products Board (Transport Control) Order 1969 – Area Commissioner's letter not a legal permit but may mitigate sentence.
* Sentencing – appellate review – when leniency by trial court need not be disturbed.
* Property – forfeiture – prosecution must adduce evidence to justify forfeiture of seized produce.
|
8 March 1978 |
| February 1978 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed where eyewitness evidence and recent-possession linked appellants to stolen cow; five-year mandatory sentences upheld.
Criminal law – cattle theft – evidence and credibility of eyewitnesses – recent possession doctrine – alibi defence – mandatory minimum sentence.
|
6 February 1978 |
| January 1978 |
|
|
|
30 January 1978 |
|
Appeal dismissed; trial court’s fine and compensation sentence for grievous harm in domestic quarrel upheld.
Criminal law – Sentencing for causing grievous harm (s.255 Penal Code) – Domestic quarrel and reconciliation as mitigating factors – Effect of guilty plea and pre-trial compensation – Appellate interference only where sentence is manifestly inadequate.
|
1 January 1978 |
|
Appeal dismissed where identification was reliable because the complainant knew the appellant and the incident occurred in daylight.
Criminal law – attempted theft; identification evidence – known complainant and daylight identification – appellate review of sufficiency of evidence; appeal dismissed.
|
1 January 1978 |
|
Appeal allowed in part: soliciting conviction upheld; convictions for receiving bribe, defacing and destroying evidence quashed for misdirection and unsafe reliance on prior statements.
* Criminal law – bribery and corruption – soliciting and receiving bribes – controlled trap with marked bank notes.
* Evidence – alibi – trial court obliged to make reasoned finding when defence and prosecution versions are mutually exclusive.
* Evidence – prior extra‑judicial statements – cannot be preferred over retracted in‑court testimony without proper procedure; treatment of hostile witness must follow law.
* Appeal – misdirection by trial court may render convictions unsafe and warrant quashing.
|
1 January 1978 |
|
Conviction based on uncorroborated accomplice testimony and uncertain identification of alleged stolen property is unsafe and quashed.
Criminal law — accomplice evidence requires material independent corroboration; identification of alleged stolen property must be particularised (marks) and proved beyond reasonable doubt; unsafe conviction where accomplice testimony uncorroborated.
|
1 January 1978 |
|
Appellants convicted under wrong provision; correct charge carried lower maximum penalty, so three‑year sentences were unlawful and release ordered.
Wild Life Conservation Act 1974 – proper statutory charge – distinction between s.31(1) (requires licence facts) and s.10 (hunting in game reserve) – sentencing limits under s.10(d) – unlawful excessive sentence – release from custody.
|
1 January 1978 |