Judgment[1996] KECA 37
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT KISUMU CRIMINAL APPEAL 79 OF 1995 FRANCIS ADAMBA DAMBA......................………………….APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC............................………………………………RESPONDENT (Appeal from a conviction and judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Kisii (Mr. Patel) dated 20th May, 1995 IN H.C.CR.APPEAL NO.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Criminal Appeal 103 of 1995 ABDALLA AHMED ABDUL RASHID………………............................................. …………..APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC…………………………..............................……………............
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL APPEAL 64 OF 1994 FESTUS WANJOHI GITHENDU………………….................................. …………………..APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC………………………................................……………………..
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAKURU CRIMINAL APPEAL 50 OF 1994 DANIEL KAMAU NGANGA……………………..........................………..……………APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC……………………………….......................……………………..……..RESPONDENT (Appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nakuru (Mr. Rimita) dated 21/4/94 IN H.C.CR.A.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Provided that after conviction and before passing sentence or making any order the court may permit or require the complainant to outline to the court the facts upon which the charge is founded.” Reading S 72 of the Constitution and S 207 of the Criminal Procedure Code together, we continue in the view that the court is to sentence the accused only for the offence with which he is charged, and that the facts to be given are the facts relating to that charge. If the prosecution wish to have the a
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Parliament until 1979, when he lost his seat; who would pay them Kshs 36,000 for carrying out that order which was described as ‘the work’. If the prosecution case was accepted there could be no question but that Charles and the second appellant were to be armed with guns when they went to arrest Tenai.