|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1980 |
|
|
Conviction quashed where charge particulars did not legally disclose careless or inconsiderate use of a motor vehicle.
Criminal law – Traffic offences – Charge particulars – Whether facts of a collision with a parked vehicle disclose the offence of inconsiderate/careless use of a motor vehicle; strict construction of penal provisions; substitution of convictions when charge is defective.
|
11 December 1980 |
|
Appellate court upheld conviction and sentence: relatives’ testimony admissible but must be treated with caution; defence failed to raise reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – Identification evidence and recovery of stolen property – Sufficiency and credibility of prosecution witnesses.
* Evidence – Relationship of witness to complainant – Admissibility and weight; such evidence may be relied upon but approached with caution.
* Criminal procedure – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Appellate interference not warranted where findings of credibility are sustainable.
|
10 December 1980 |
|
An evidentiary error concerning bad-character material was harmless; conviction and minimum sentence under s.5(b) were affirmed.
* Evidence — Similar-fact/bad-character evidence — admissibility under s.56(1) Evidence Act 1967; common-law rationale for exclusion (prejudice, collateral issues, surprise).
* Criminal procedure — duty of trial magistrate to prevent eliciting inadmissible bad-character evidence, particularly in undefended cases.
* Appeal — harmless error/miscarriage of justice test: whether evidentiary error vitiates conviction.
* Sentencing — Minimum Sentences Act 1972: application of s.5(b) and inapplicability of s.6(1) merciful provisions.
|
3 December 1980 |
| November 1980 |
|
|
Appellant’s conviction for diverting company maize upheld despite trial error; handlers were not accomplices and guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – theft of company goods – location of off‑loading; evidence – accomplice status of handlers of suspected stolen goods; extra‑judicial confession – voluntariness and admissibility; standard of proof – safety of conviction absent contested confession.
|
24 November 1980 |
|
Inconclusive identification of a seized skin and failure to mark an exhibit required acquittal and quashing of conviction.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Owner's statement that exhibit 'looks like' stolen animal insufficient for positive identification without supporting admissible evidence.
* Criminal law – Benefit of doubt – Inconclusive identification evidence requires doubt to be resolved for the accused.
* Evidence/procedure – Exhibits – Failure to mark and formally admit exhibits is procedural error; magistrates must follow established marking and admission procedure to preserve the record.
|
14 November 1980 |
|
Recent possession of stolen cattle justified convicting the applicant for theft; mandatory minimum sentence upheld.
Criminal law – Theft – Recent possession as evidence – recent possession of stolen property can justify inference of participation; Identification evidence; Minimum Sentences Act – mandatory minimum sentence upheld.
|
14 November 1980 |
|
Conviction upheld on recent possession evidence; appellate court may not reduce a statutorily prescribed minimum sentence.
* Criminal law – Theft – Recent possession – Possession of part of stolen property shortly after theft may justify inference of participation in the theft.
* Evidence – Weight of confession – Confession to a non-police official may be of limited weight but is admissible and considered with other evidence.
* Sentencing – Minimum statutory sentence – Appellate courts cannot reduce a sentence that is the statutory minimum.
|
14 November 1980 |
|
Whether a plot-allocation committee may subdivide a privately purchased plot and whether defying a court order warrants demolition.
* Land dispute – alleged private purchase from deceased – possession and proof of title; * Local plot allocation committee – limits of authority to subdivide privately held plots; * Civil procedure – interim court orders and consequences of defiance; * Remedies – demolition of unauthorised structure and costs.
|
13 November 1980 |
|
A plot allocation committee cannot lawfully subdivide an allocated plot; defying a court injunction warranted demolition and costs.
* Land dispute – plot allocation committee – authority of local committee to subdivide allocated plots – committee had no power to subdivide an already allocated plot.
* Civil procedure – interim injunction – consequences of defying a court order – defiance justified demolition and costs.
* Possession remedies – relief for wrongful occupation and unauthorized construction upheld on appeal.
|
13 November 1980 |
| October 1980 |
|
|
Appeal against conviction after a guilty plea in a subordinate court is incompetent; three-year sentence for a 16-year-old reduced to six months.
* Criminal procedure – guilty plea in subordinate court – appeal against conviction incompetent except as to extent or legality of sentence. * Sentencing – youth and first-offender mitigation – manifestly excessive sentence reduced. * Application of minimum sentence provisions and discretion in sentencing.
|
31 October 1980 |
|
Convictions upheld on reliable identification evidence; sentencing order varied to make concurrent sentences for same‑transaction offences.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – eyewitness identification at short distance on full‑moon night – delay in naming accused explained and did not undermine credibility; Sentencing – offences in same transaction – concurrent sentences as general rule; consecutive sentences require exceptional circumstances.
|
31 October 1980 |
|
Familiar-witness identification upheld; sentences for offences in the same transaction must run concurrently.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual recognition by familiar witnesses on moonlit night – Delay in naming accused explained and not fatal to credibility.
* Criminal law – Conviction – Appellants’ defences insufficient to displace proximate identification evidence.
* Sentencing – Concurrent versus consecutive sentences – Offences arising from same transaction ordinarily attract concurrent sentences; lack of exceptional circumstances precludes consecutive order.
|
31 October 1980 |
|
Despite erroneous admission of hearsay, the court found guilt proved beyond reasonable doubt and summarily dismissed the appeal.
* Criminal law – evidence – admissibility of hearsay evidence – trial court error.
* Appellate review – harmless error – conviction sustained where guilt proved beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal Procedure Code s.317(1)(a) – certification of appeals lacking sufficient grounds – summary rejection.
|
22 October 1980 |
|
Refusal to adjourn and denial of legal representation rendered convictions unsafe; appeal allowed and retrial permitted.
Criminal procedure – Right to legal representation – Section 190 Criminal Procedure Code – Adjournment to obtain counsel – Waiver of counsel – Deprivation requires cogent and exceptional reasons – Conviction unsafe if fair opportunity to obtain lawyer denied.
|
17 October 1980 |
|
Appeal dismissed where lower courts’ credible findings that respondent owned the felled trees were unchallenged on appeal.
Property law – ownership of trees – evidence and site inspection supporting trial court’s finding; Appeals – appellate interference with concurrent findings of fact – no disturbance absent misdirection or arguable grounds; Civil damages – quantum may be varied by appellate court but does not invalidate ownership finding.
|
14 October 1980 |
| August 1980 |
|
|
Appellant’s theft conviction quashed for insufficient proof; facts indicate negligent loss of government funds, suggesting charge under s. 284A P.C.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – sufficiency of evidence to prove theft beyond reasonable doubt; access to locked drawer and duplicate key issues; negligence in safeguarding government funds; proper charge under s. 284A Penal Code (loss by negligence) versus theft provisions.
|
28 August 1980 |
| July 1980 |
|
|
Unauthorized relocation of a child that frustrates reasonable access warranted change of custody and dismissal of the appeal.
Family law – custody – condition requiring custody holder to afford the other parent reasonable access; relocation of child outside jurisdiction without consent; service of process and ex parte proceedings; best interests of the child – change of custody where relocation frustrates access.
|
30 July 1980 |
|
Sentence for overloading reduced where court failed to consider offender’s means and mitigating circumstances.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Overloading of passengers – Court must consider offender’s means and mitigating factors; excessive fine reduced.
|
28 July 1980 |
|
Appellate court reduced an excessive overloading fine, holding the trial court failed to assess the accused's means before sentencing.
Road Traffic Act – Overloading – Sentencing – Fine manifestly excessive – Duty to inquire into accused's means before imposing fines – Default imprisonment only in deserving cases – Sentencing should not indirectly punish vehicle owner.
|
23 July 1980 |
|
Conviction for corrupt transactions quashed where informant-led evidence was uncorroborated and a key witness was not called.
* Criminal law – Corruption – Prevention of Corruption Act ss.3(1), 3(a) – conviction based largely on an informant’s evidence who organised a 'trap' – need for caution and corroboration. * Criminal procedure – Failure to call a key witness whose evidence is central – effect on safety of conviction. * Evidence – Receipt of marked money insufficient alone to establish corrupt intent; nexus to official acts required.
|
23 July 1980 |
|
Appellant's conviction for stealing railway property upheld after being caught red‑handed; planting defence rejected.
* Criminal law – Theft/stealing – Person found with railway spare part at gate during routine search – Caught red‑handed; defence of planting rejected. * Charge description – Misdescription as "public servant" vs "servant" immaterial where evidence proves offence. * Sentence – Three years' imprisonment upheld as minimum appropriate term.
|
18 July 1980 |
|
Possession of stolen property found long after a burglary does not automatically prove burglary; conviction substituted to receiving stolen property.
Criminal law – possession of stolen property – whether possession long after theft establishes original burglary or stealing – proper charge may be receiving stolen property; appellate substitution of conviction and sentence.
|
16 July 1980 |
| June 1980 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed; respondent’s ownership of 67 trees upheld based on allotment evidence and witness credibility.
* Property dispute – ownership of trees – evidence of allotment of land to respondent – credibility of witnesses – weight of unsworn villagers’ statements at site inspection – appellant barred from raising factual disputes on appeal that were not contested below.
|
12 June 1980 |
|
Appellate court defers to trial court credibility findings and dismisses appellant’s claim to two cows for lack of proof.
Property dispute; ownership of livestock – factual dispute determined on credibility and demeanour – appellate court’s deference to trial court and corroborative evidence – appeal dismissed.
|
12 June 1980 |
| May 1980 |
|
|
Claim for recovery of a cow was dismissed as statute-barred despite disputes over return or payment.
* Civil procedure – recovery of chattel – custody of a cow and dispute whether cow was returned or equivalent paid – credibility of defendant’s account.
* Limitation of actions – claim barred by statutory limitation period; suit dismissed on time-bar grounds despite factual disputes.
* Appellate review – where limitation bars claim, appellate court may allow appeal even if lower courts made adverse credibility findings.
|
30 May 1980 |
|
Second appeal affirms lower court: claimant failed to prove offspring; entitled only to return of three cows and shs.100.
Civil appeal – disputed bride‑price refund of cattle – credibility of witnesses – proof of issue (offspring) – disposal of bride‑price cattle – second appeal limited to points of law and not reappraising findings of fact – limitation (prescription) where plaintiff was abroad.
|
30 May 1980 |
|
Conviction quashed for inadequately supported accessory charge; principal’s conviction and minimum sentence upheld on documentary and possession evidence.
* Criminal law – Cattle theft – Evidence required to convict a principal versus an accessory after the fact – Possession shortly after theft and documentary sale evidence as proof of guilt.* Criminal law – Conviction cannot rest on mere suspicion; clear supporting evidence required.* Sentencing – Five-year term upheld as minimum prescribed by law for cattle theft.
|
21 May 1980 |
| April 1980 |
|
|
Possession of recently stolen property without satisfactory explanation supports burglary and theft convictions; concurrent sentences affirmed.
* Criminal law – Burglary and theft – possession of recently stolen goods – inference of guilt where possession soon after theft and no satisfactory explanation. * Criminal law – Distinction between actual thief and guilty receiver – surrounding circumstances and witness evidence. * Sentencing – concurrent one-year terms affirmed as not unduly harsh given prevalence of offences.
|
19 April 1980 |
|
Appeal against conviction and statutory five‑year sentence for stealing by a public servant dismissed, subject to compensation variation.
Criminal law – Stealing by public servant – Sufficiency and corroboration of evidence as to handover and quantities of government property – Minimum Sentences Act (s.5(d)) – Appeal dismissed save for variation in compensation.
|
16 April 1980 |
| March 1980 |
|
|
Appeal allowed: police confession inadmissible and witness inconsistencies rendered the theft conviction unsafe.
* Criminal law – Evidence – Admissibility of confessions/admissions made to police – Proper application of statutory rule (s.27) and authorities. * Criminal law – Theft by agent (s.273(b)) – Sufficiency and consistency of witness evidence to prove conversion of entrusted money. * Appellate review – Conviction unsafe where it relies on improperly admitted confession and materially inconsistent witness statements.
|
5 March 1980 |
| February 1980 |
|
|
Forgery requires falsity as to a document's purport; convictions unsafe where evidence rests on untested hearsay and single-witness reliance.
Criminal law – Forgery and uttering – requirement that falsity relate to a document's purport (autamendacity) under s.335; Obtaining by false pretences – convictions unsafe where based mainly on a single witness, untested hearsay (logbook) and uncalled key witness; Evidence – hearsay rule and need to consider defence witnesses when assessing credibility.
|
29 February 1980 |
|
Appellate court upheld robbery conviction, finding daylight identification and trial credibility findings reliable.
Criminal law – Robbery – Identification evidence in daylight – Credibility findings in oath-against-oath cases – Appellate interference with trial court's factual findings.
|
29 February 1980 |
| January 1980 |
|
|
Reported
Administrative Law — Natural Justice—Right of being represented by legal counsel — Case heard on date fixed for mention — Counsel absent — Accused deprived of his right of legal representation — Whether proper — (Section 190 of the Criminal, Procedure Code). |
2 January 1980 |
|
Failure by the magistrate to comply with mandatory trial-transfer formalities rendered the conviction a nullity; convictions quashed, no retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – Trial-transfer requirements – Mandatory compliance with section 196 (or equivalent) when a second magistrate takes over a case – Failure to comply renders proceedings a nullity – Retrial discretionary and not ordered in this case.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Conviction based chiefly on an interested single witness’s uncorroborated evidence was unsafe and required caution.
* Criminal law – robbery with violence – conviction based largely on a single witness’s evidence – need for caution where witness is in possession of stolen property and potentially interested.
* Evidence – weight of uncorroborated testimony – one witness may suffice but must be scrutinised when witness may have motive to lie.
* Prosecution duty – failure to call other alleged witnesses (including co-accused) weakens case and affects safety of conviction.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Convictions unsafe where cheque was validly authorised and vendor suffered no fraud; proper issue was misappropriation of employer’s goods.
Criminal law – stealing by servant; obtaining goods by false pretence – requirement of proof of theft of instrument (cheque leaf) and proof of fraud on the vendor; proper identification of victim (employer v vendor); wrong charge where evidence points to misappropriation of employer’s goods.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Appellant proved purchase and long possession of land; lower courts erred in excluding spouse’s evidence and in procedural handling.
Land dispute — ownership of shamba — purchase and long possession; competency of spouse as witness — Regulation 16; primary court procedure — framing issues (Rule 44); appellate reliance on sketch plan not in record; evidential weight of non-protest and failure to call witnesses.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Favourable identification conditions and possession of an imitation pistol upheld robbery conviction and eight-year sentence.
* Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Identification evidence – Whether conditions (lighting, prior acquaintance, distinctive features) were favourable for reliable identification.
* Criminal law – Corroboration – Possession of imitation/ toy pistol as supporting evidence.
* Appeal – Challenge to identification – appellate court defers to trial court where identification conditions were favourable and credibility accepted.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Robbery conviction upheld on evidence of violence and theft; eight-year sentence reduced to seven years.
* Criminal law – Robbery with violence – elements: force or threat and dispossession of money taken from person; evidence of possession of stolen money supports conviction. * Criminal procedure – Appeal against conviction – sufficiency of evidence. * Sentencing – whether imposed term is excessive – appellate reduction from eight to seven years for minimal-value robbery.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Robbery conviction upheld; eight-year sentence reduced to seven years due to minimal violence.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Threat and taking of money from victim's pocket – Possession of stolen property as evidence; Criminal procedure – Appeal against sentence – Appellate reduction where violence minimal and original term excessive.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Appeal dismissed; possession of government trophies established by recovery near appellant’s house and burden to prove lawful possession unmet.
Wildlife Conservation Act 1974 – possession of government trophies – proof of possession from recovery on accused’s premises – burden on accused to show lawful possession once trophy found – admissibility and sufficiency of identification evidence.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Appeal dismissed; Rule 80A inapplicable where husband died and Rule 54 governs dowry return; appellant's claim against father‑in‑law was ill‑founded.
Customary law — dowry (mahari) — applicability of Declaration of Customary Law Rules — Rule 80A concerns death of the woman partner and is inapplicable where husband dies; Rule 54 governs return of dowry where husband dies before divorce. Civil liability — enticement/relief — suit against father‑in‑law not maintainable where third party enticed wife and wife voluntarily lives with her father; remedy may lie in divorce or action against the actual wrongdoer.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Conviction for robbery substituted with common assault where evidence failed to establish robbery, sentence accordingly reduced.
* Criminal law – Distinction between robbery and common assault – sufficiency of evidence to establish robbery; substitution of conviction on appeal where lesser offence proven.* Criminal procedure – Appeal against conviction – appellate power to quash conviction and substitute a conviction for a lesser offence where evidence does not support the original charge.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Whether an accounts clerk who processed LPOs and payments can be criminally liable where payments were made for undelivered goods.
* Criminal law – fraud, conspiracy, obtaining money by false pretences, fraudulent accounting and forgery – sufficiency of evidence to convict where goods were not delivered but payments made and co‑accused’s extrajudicial confession implicates appellant.* Defence of good faith reliance on orders from a storekeeper – whether such conduct absolves criminal liability when other evidence links accused to proceeds.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
The accused convicted of murder where witness testimony, post‑mortem and recovered weapon corroborated his guilt; defences rejected.
Criminal law – Murder – Identification and corroboration of witness testimony – Post‑mortem evidence and recovered weapon – Alibi, intoxication and provocation considered and rejected – Sentence: death by hanging.
|
1 January 1980 |
|
Whether cohabitation and payment of dowry suffice to establish paternity and a right to custody of the child.
* Family law – paternity – proof of biological parentage – role of evidence of cohabitation, seduction and customary dowry payments.
* Custody/disputes over child – entitlement to return of child – effect of respondent’s removal of child and delay before trial.
|
1 January 1980 |