|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1979 |
|
|
Circumstantial evidence failing to exclude other reasonable hypotheses cannot sustain a theft conviction; conviction and restitution quashed.
Criminal law – sufficiency of circumstantial evidence; conviction unsafe where alternative hypotheses not excluded; relevance of co-accused acquittal and shared access; restitution dependent on valid conviction.
|
18 December 1979 |
|
Convictions quashed where accounting discrepancies and unreliable handwriting evidence failed to prove theft beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Theft of public revenue – Insufficiency of accounting discrepancies alone to prove theft; Evidence – Handwriting identification – foundation required under s.49 Evidence Act; Procedure – Impermissible omnibus charging without particularising occasions and responsibility; Misapplication of inference from unauthorised delegation of duties to criminal guilt.
|
18 December 1979 |
|
Appeal against burglary and theft convictions dismissed where record established guilt and sentences were lawful.
* Criminal law – Burglary and theft – Appeal – Whether convictions supported by record – Whether sentences lawful or excessive – Appellate summary dismissal where guilt established and sentences within statutory bounds.
|
18 December 1979 |
| October 1979 |
|
|
Whether the applicant was properly identified as participating in an armed robbery and if bail cancellation showed trial bias.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Identification evidence – Immediate identification at scene/petrol station shortly after offence and possession of stolen currency as corroboration.
* Criminal procedure – Bail – Cancellation by trial magistrate – Discretion to cancel bail and not automatically evidence of bias.
* Appeal – Conviction – Appellate court will not disturb convictions supported by credible identification and corroborative evidence.
* Sentence – Appellate limitation – Court may be inclined to stricter sentence but may not enhance in these circumstances.
|
31 October 1979 |
|
Failure to repay a loan and accounting irregularities do not, by themselves, sustain a conviction for stealing by a public servant.
Criminal law – stealing by public servant – distinction between unpaid loan (civil remedy) and theft – sufficiency of evidence – accounting irregularities (absence of vouchers/receipts) and hearsay undermining prosecution case.
|
16 October 1979 |
|
Discrepancies between original and duplicate receipts, plus admission and failure to account, supported convictions and mandatory sentence.
* Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Embezzlement – Discrepancy between original and duplicate/triplicate receipts as evidence of deception and alteration. * Evidence – Documentary exhibits and admissions – Where accused admits issuing original receipt but fails to account for funds, inference of guilt may properly follow. * Sentencing – Mandatory minimum sentence under Minimum Sentences Act upheld.
|
16 October 1979 |
|
The accused was convicted of murder on accepted identification and corroboration, with flight supporting guilt; sentenced to death.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – reliability and necessity of corroboration where identification is central. * Identification parade – improper reliance on exposed teeth or single features and effect on probative value. * Credibility assessment – rejection of inconsistent eyewitnesses and acceptance of independent tea‑shop witness. * Flight and concealment as evidence of consciousness of guilt. * Murder – malice aforethought inferred from aiming and shooting at the head.
|
5 October 1979 |
| September 1979 |
|
|
Appeal against theft conviction and five-year sentence dismissed for lack of merit; trial properly conducted.
* Criminal law – Theft – Conviction under Penal Code ss. 271 and 265 – Appeal – appellate interference with trial court findings; * Criminal procedure – Fair trial and proper conduct of proceedings – standard for upsetting conviction and sentence on appeal.
|
24 September 1979 |
|
Appeal against multiple theft convictions and sentences dismissed; lost exhibits did not prejudice the defence.
* Criminal law – Theft – Sufficiency of evidence to prove failure to account for proceeds of sales by employee.
* Evidence – Loss of exhibits – Whether subsequent loss prejudices accused when exhibits were produced and the accused had opportunity to cross‑examine.
* Criminal procedure – Burden of proof – Trial magistrate’s misdirection considered but not fatal where evidence remains overwhelming.
* Sentencing – Irregularities and inconsistency in sentences – Curable under statutory provision and not necessarily warranting appellate interference.
|
20 September 1979 |
| August 1979 |
|
|
Appeals dismissed for two convicted railway employees; acquittal of a third set aside and conviction entered; fourth remains at large.
* Criminal law – Theft from railway wagons – liability of railway employees for facilitating theft by improper placement and gate control. * Evidence – Identification and corroboration by casual labourers sufficient to sustain conviction. * Appeals – Setting aside acquittal where credible identification and corroboration exist. * Procedural – Appeal against absentee accused may be pursued when apprehended.
|
20 August 1979 |
|
Convictions quashed where prosecution failed to prove theft and false accounting beyond reasonable doubt amid unreliable accounting evidence.
Criminal law – theft by public servant – burden of proof and credibility – missing accounting vouchers – fraudulent false accounting – responsibility for cash-book entries – unsafe convictions.
|
3 August 1979 |
| July 1979 |
|
|
A conviction based solely on uncorroborated accomplice testimony is unsafe and was quashed.
Criminal law – Evidence – Accomplice evidence requires independent corroboration; one accomplice’s testimony cannot corroborate another; conviction unsafe without corroboration.
|
20 July 1979 |
|
Where reasonable suspicion shifts the onus, the accused need only rebut it on the balance of probabilities; mere disproportionate assets are not conclusive.
* Criminal law – Corruption investigations – Prevention of Corruption Act s.9(1), s.9(1A) – reasonable grounds for suspicion; burden shift to accused; standard of proof on balance of probabilities.
* Criminal law – Possession of property suspected to have been unlawfully acquired – Penal Code s.312(1) – conviction unsafe where shifted onus discharged.
* Evidence – Disproportionate assets – not by itself conclusive of corrupt acquisition; must consider all circumstances.
* Procedure – Requirement for corroboration and proof beyond civil standard is misdirection when onus shifts under s.9(1A).
* Investigations – Conduct of anti‑corruption squad criticised for overzealousness.
|
20 July 1979 |
|
Conviction for criminal trespass quashed where appellant had prior peaceful possession and prosecution failed to prove essential elements.
* Criminal law – Criminal trespass (s.299(a) Penal Code) – Elements: wrongful entry plus intent to commit an offence or to intimidate/insult/annoy person in possession – burden on prosecution to prove possession and intent.
* Possession and title – Prior peaceful occupation, cultivation and permanent improvements may establish possession against forcible village claims.
* Public authorities and village bodies – Forcible seizure without legal incorporation, lawful allocation or compensation is not authorised; prosecution must prove lawful entitlement of complainants.
* Appeal – Conviction unsupported by evidence and by prosecutor’s non-support is liable to be quashed.
|
20 July 1979 |
|
Possession of excess goods plus forged receipts supports inference goods were stolen; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Theft and store-breaking – Identification of stolen property – Possession of excess goods and falsified receipts as basis for inference that goods were stolen – Sufficiency of evidence to uphold conviction.
|
10 July 1979 |
| May 1979 |
|
|
Appellate court defers to trial judge on witness credibility and dismisses appeal; conviction and mandatory sentence affirmed.
* Criminal law – theft by public servant – failure to account for proceeds of sale; * Evidence – assessment of witness credibility; appellate deference to trial judge; * Sentencing – mandatory minimum sentence applies.
|
21 May 1979 |
|
Where the applicant's age is doubtful, the doubt must be resolved in the applicant's favour, barring imposition of minimum sentence.
* Criminal law – Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act – age of accused – where age doubtful, doubt resolved in favour of accused.
* Criminal appeal – Review of sentence – erroneous application of mandatory minimum sentence where age uncertain.
* Evidence – medical report and charge-sheet discrepancies regarding accused’s age.
|
21 May 1979 |
|
Sole reliance on an interested witness without corroboration and improper handling of an alibi document renders a conviction unsafe.
Criminal law – accomplice and interested witness — requirement for corroboration of evidence of witness with interest; possession of recently stolen property as corroboration; alibi documents and procedure under s.151 Criminal Procedure Code; mandatory minimum sentence for burglary.
|
4 May 1979 |
| April 1979 |
|
|
Complaint’s reliable identification and the appellant’s post-arrest conduct satisfactorily corroborated guilt; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – familiarity between complainant and accused; presence of light – reliability of identification. * Evidence – unsworn testimony of a child who cannot understand an oath has little probative value and cannot alone sustain a conviction. * Conduct after arrest – flight and inconsistent behaviour may corroborate guilt. * Sentence – three years for burglary is the minimum and may be upheld absent compelling grounds to reduce.
|
23 April 1979 |
|
Misdirection on burden and failure to evaluate evidence left conviction unsafe, so it was quashed.
* Criminal law – burden of proof – prosecution bears burden; accused need not prove innocence. * Criminal procedure – s.171 Criminal Procedure Code – duty to evaluate all evidence and state reasons and findings. * Appeal – unsafe conviction where trial court fails to determine who was aggressor in a fight. * Sentence & compensation – set aside when conviction is quashed.
|
23 April 1979 |
|
The appellant's appeal against an attempted extortion conviction and four‑year sentence is dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.
Criminal law – Attempted extortion (s.290(2) Penal Code); identification parade and eyewitness credibility; corroboration by trap/marked notes; burden of proof in criminal trial; appellate review of sentence severity.
|
23 April 1979 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution failed to produce accounting documents and improperly shifted burden to the accused.
Criminal law – proof beyond reasonable doubt – failure of prosecution to produce accounting documents and auditor – improper shifting of burden to accused – conviction quashed; restitution of monies paid under promise of leniency.
|
2 April 1979 |
|
A future promise to perform does not constitute a false pretence to obtain money; conviction quashed.
* Criminal law – obtaining money by false pretences – representation must relate to past or present fact, not to future promises. * Future promise does not constitute false pretence. * Circumstantial evidence and interested witnesses may require corroboration, but legal characterisation of representation is dispositive.
|
2 April 1979 |
|
Acquittal on forgery and lack of proof of government ownership undermined theft conviction; appeal allowed, sentence and refund set aside.
Criminal law – theft by public servant – acquittal on forgery affecting theft charge; burden of proof – improper adverse inference from late production of defence document; cheque endorsement and holder’s title; insufficiency of proof of government ownership; setting aside mandatory sentence and refund order.
|
2 April 1979 |
|
Manager's emergency purchases at higher prices were reasonable; conviction for causing employer loss quashed.
* Criminal law – causing pecuniary loss by employee – proof of overinvoicing or secret commission required for conviction
* Standard of reasonableness for managerial procurement decisions during shortages
* Appellate review – insufficiency of evidence and resolving reasonable doubt in favour of accused
* Improper reliance on witnesses' ‘shock’ or court’s subjective surprise as basis for conviction
|
2 April 1979 |
| March 1979 |
|
|
Conviction for reckless driving quashed where trial judge relied on opinion evidence as to speed and ignored police witnesses' potential bias.
Criminal law – Reckless driving – Ingredients of offence – Improper reliance on opinion evidence as to speed – Credibility and potential bias of police witnesses – Conviction unsafe and quashed.
|
5 March 1979 |
| January 1979 |
|
|
Appeal against theft conviction and five-year sentence dismissed; evidence and sentence affirmed despite minor charging irregularity.
* Criminal law – Theft – Conviction upheld where recovered stolen property found at third party’s house and delivery to that house was credibly attributed to appellant – serial number identification and eyewitness corroboration. * Evidence – Trial magistrate’s assessment of credibility; corroboration by independent witness sufficient to support conviction. * Sentence – Five-year custodial sentence affirmed; deterrent sentencing for property offences. * Procedure – Minor irregularity in charge wording (section 265 read with section 20) held non-prejudicial.
|
31 January 1979 |
|
Recent possession and credible eyewitnesses upheld the appellant's conviction; duplicity in the charge was curable; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – house‑breaking and theft; doctrine of recent possession; identification of stolen property; duplicity in indictment; curability under s.346 Criminal Procedure Code; sentence—mandatory minimum and reasonableness.
|
31 January 1979 |
|
Appellate court dismissed appeal: evidence of recent possession and inconsistent receipt supported conviction; mandatory sentence under Minimum Sentences Act upheld.
* Criminal law – Receiving stolen property (s.312 Penal Code) – recent possession and complainant identification as evidence of knowledge. * Evidence – documentary inconsistency (receipt) undermining accused’s defence. * Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act 1972; scheduled offences attract mandatory sentences limiting appellate interference.
|
10 January 1979 |
|
Conviction for burglary and theft upheld on credible witness evidence and corroboration; mandatory minimum sentence sustained.
Criminal law – Burglary and theft – credibility of prosecution witnesses – corroboration by purchaser of stolen goods – attempted concealment – mandatory minimum sentence under Minimum Sentences Act, 1972.
|
5 January 1979 |
|
A conviction for dangerous driving was unsafe where the trial court's reasoning was speculative and ignored the applicant's exculpatory evidence.
* Criminal law – Dangerous driving – Whether conviction sustainable where trial court's reasoning rests on speculation and ignores exculpatory defence evidence.
* Evidence – Evaluation of conflicting eyewitness accounts – duty to consider defence evidence and avoid impermissible inferences.
* Criminal procedure – Misdirection/non-direction by trial judge as ground for appellate intervention.
|
1 January 1979 |
|
Appeal challenges whether eyewitness evidence and credibility findings sufficiently supported a police driver's conviction for theft by a public servant.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Credibility assessment of accused alleging kidnapping – Reliability of eyewitness identification across border – Sufficiency of evidence to sustain conviction.
|
1 January 1979 |
|
Removal of goods from a broken-secured box with intent constituted sufficient asportation to uphold theft convictions.
* Criminal law – Theft – Elements – Asportation: removal of goods from a box with broken padlocks and intent suffices for asportation. * Evidence – Credibility and corroboration of eyewitnesses in surprise inspection. * Criminal procedure – Grounds not raised at trial (afterthoughts) cannot be used to vitiate conviction. * Alleged inducement of a witness: unsupported where witness was later convicted.
|
1 January 1979 |