Search court decisions

…The appellant submitted that he was supplied with witness statements, medical reports or any other prosecution documents used in trial against him, thereby violating his constitutional rights under Article 50 (2) (c) and…

…Whether the appellant’s constitutional rights to fair trial under Article 50 (2) ( c) and (j) were violated 24.…

…The Appellant filed supplementary grounds of appeal wherein he raised the issue of violation of his constitutional rights to a fair trial.…

…Whether the Appellant’s Constitutional Rights were violated The Appellant submitted that his constitutional rights under Article 49 (1) (f), which required him to be arraigned in court within the 24 hours, were violated.…

…The other grounds border on failure of the court to give the appellant a fair hearing and violating his constitutional rights to a fair trial.…

…I will start with the issue of violation of the appellant’s constitutional rights.…

…Whether the Appellant’s constitutional rights were violated. Whether the offence was proved to the required standard. Whether the sentence was just and legal. Analysis and Determination Whether the charge was defective.…

…Whether the Appellant’s constitutional rights were violated.…

…Whether the appellant’s constitutional rights were violated. ii. Whether the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Whether the appellant’s constitutional rights were violated 19.…

…Further, in his submissions the appellant contended that he was convicted on the basis of assumptions and conjecture rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt which violated his constitutional rights under Article 50 (2).…

…The trial magistrate erred in law and in fact in failing to find that the constitutional rights of the Appellant had been breached by his delay in custody before he was arraigned in court. vii.…

…Whether the trial magistrate erred in law and fact by failing to find that the Appellant had been denied his constitutional rights, to wit right to counsel and whether his rights were breached by the alleged delay in arraigning…

…He submitted that his constitutional rights under Article 50 (1) (2) (g) and (h) of the Constitution were violated since he was not informed of his right to counsel and was not assigned counsel at state expense despite the…

…Whether the appellant’s constitutional rights under Article 50 (2) (g) and (h) of the Constitution were violated and if so, what is the remedy thereof. i.…

…I will begin my analysis with the argument by the appellant that his constitutional rights were violated and that the charge sheet was defective.…

…A party who claims that their constitutional rights were violated must identify the specific rights and demonstrate in which way they were violated.…

…There is real apprehension that the pending appeal may take long before it is heard and determined and if the Applicant is not admitted or released on bail he will be prejudiced and his constitutional rights violated. d.…

…The applicant also states that he is apprehensive that the pending appeal may take long before it is heard and determined and if he is not admitted or released on bail, he will be prejudiced and his constitutional rights…

…He has preferred an appeal against the findings of the trial court on the grounds that:The learned trial magistrate erred in law and fact by failing to protect the constitutional rights of the appellant to a fair trial contrary…

…know the language of the court since no one was translating the language being used in court; and The learned trial magistrate erred in law and fact by failing to consider the tenets of fair trial and that the appellant’s constitutional…

…Whether the Appellant’s constitutional rights were violated during trial. Whether the trial court properly evaluated the defence and prosecution evidence. Whether the sentence was excessive or unlawful.…

…On the issue as to whether the Charge Sheet was defective and whether the appellant’s Constitutional rights were violated, the Appellant alleged that the charge sheet was defective and not served on him.…

…Dissatisfied with that decision, the appellant filed a petition of appeal dated 19/5/2025 raising five grounds of appeal summarised as follows: - a) That the trial court erred in law and in fact in not making a finding that the Constitutional…

…Rights of the appellant were breached hence not a fair trial. b) That the trial court erred in both law and fact on relying on evidence that was full of contradictions thus leading to his conviction where the prosecution…

…The application is premised on the ground that the Appellant’s constitutional rights to a fair trial particularly the right to have this appeal expeditiously heard and disposed off has been violated. 2.…

…Consequently, the Appellant’s constitutional rights to a fair trial and to have his appeal heard and determined expeditiously have been violated.…

…The application is premised on the ground that the Appellant’s constitutional rights to a fair trial particularly the right to have this appeal expeditiously heard and disposed off has been violated. 2.…

…Consequently, the Appellant’s constitutional rights to a fair trial and to have his appeal heard and determined expeditiously have been violated.…

…fact in not making a finding that the prosecution's case was full of contradictions and inconsistencies among its witnesses. e) The trial court erred in law and in fact in not making a finding that the trial breached the constitutional…

…rights of the appellant, hence an unfair trial. 4.…

…Whether the appellant’s constitutional rights under Article 25 and 50 of the Constitution were violated ii. Whether the prosecution proved the offence of defilement beyond reasonable doubt iii.…

…Whether the sentence was excessive, harsh and unjustified Whether the appellant’s constitutional rights to fair trial under Article 25 and 50 of the Constitution were violated 23.…

…From the trial record, it is indeed clear that the Appellant abrogated his constitutional rights by absconding court for a record of 22 times over a period of 2 years.…

…When called upon to enter his defence, he abrogated his constitutional rights to fair trial. 38.…

…Rights. 2) Unproportional sentence that does not achieve the objectives of sentencing against Sentencing Guidelines. 3) Rejection of the appellants plausible defence.…

…rights of the applicants – (Prof.…

…convicting the appellant yet failed to appreciate that the DNA result exonerated the appellant. f) The learned trial magistrate erred in law by denying the appellant the right to file his final submissions, contravening his constitutional…

…rights to a fair trial. 4.…