Search court decisions

…The prosecution offered absolutely no explanation as to why they kept the appellant in custody for that long period and what they had been doing with her.…

…– they ie the prosecution, must prove that the length of the period for which the accused was in their custody had no effect on his making the statement.…

…There are, however, other aspects of the case for the prosecution which we must consider.…

…Inspector David Wangombe who investigated the murder also gave evidence for the prosecution which has some unusual features.…

…The grounds of appeal are briefly that the judge erred in confirming the conviction when the RM in his judgment had evaluated the evidence for the prosecution in isolation and failed to consider the unsworn statement, also…

…Thus the judge accepted the prosecution’s case and proceeded to dismiss the appeal. That is worse than commission of the error of looking separately at the case for the prosecution and the case for defence.…

…His argument before that Court was that the entire prosecution case against him was dependent on the alleged evidence of identification.…

…Without its consideration and findings made on it, the issue of the appellant’s correct identification remained unresolved, since that defence conflicted with the prosecution case in that connection.…

…The case for the prosecution was that the complainant Philomena Wambui (PW 1) was travelling home in a matatu when the appellant snatched her handbag, wrist-watch and Kshs 2,150 cash.…

…The learned trial magistrate found the evidence of PW 1 and PW 2 truthful and found that the prosecution had proved its case to the degree required. He accordingly convicted the appellant as charged.…

…The prosecution claimed that they had robbed one John Bwana Opundo of cash Kshs 6000. According to the prosecution, the complainant arrived from Bondo with a view to do some shopping in Kisumu. He has a shop there.…

…He held that the prosecution’s version of the matter was the side of truth and that the appellant and his confederates indeed robbed the complainant of his money.…

…B.Ombewa) found that the prosecution had provided its case with sufficient and reliable evidence to convict the appellant with the offence of defilement.…

…which evidence did not prove the prosecution’s case beyond reasonable grounds; and in upholding a sentence which was excessive.…

…That charge, he alleges, arose in the performance of his duties as an advocate and according to him, before the prosecution could be started by the Attorney-General section 80 of the Advocates Act should have been complied…

…The proviso to that section is to the effect that no prosecution for an offence under that section shall be instituted unless a report has been made to the Attorney – General by the Disciplinary Committee created under the…

…The prosecution case was dependent on the evidence of PW1.…

…In the result, I am persuaded that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt that the accused beat the deceased for 20 minutes.…

…Criminal Law – false pretence – charge of procuring registration of land by false pretences - Penal Code (cap 63) section 320 - whether prosecution for the offence can be brought after lapse of a long time – section 219 Criminal…

…The appellant’s main ground of appeal was that neither the trial magistrate nor the learned first appellate judge gave any or adequate consideration to the discrepancies and conflicts in the evidence of the several prosecution…

…when but the appellant formed the opinion that his collegues had schemed against him and that consequently a crime had been committed so in 1986 the appellant went before the Chief Magistrate for permission for private prosecution…

…In the instant case, the appellant was pursuing a right to file a private prosecution. Only the Attorney-General has the right under section 26 of the Constitution to institute criminal proceedings.…

…Kivihya appearing for the Director of Public Prosecutions opposing the appeal as one without merit submitted that the doctrine of recent possession was properly applied.…

…In the case of Arum v Republic, Court of Appeal at Kisumu Criminal Appeal no. 85 of 2005, it was held that the doctrine of recent possession is applicable where the court is satisfied that the prosecution have proved the…

…The learned Judge sat with three assessors and he heard all the eleven witnesses called by the prosecution in support of its case. After listening to the submissions of the appellant’s then advocate Mr.…

…No summing-up notes were available on the record and the incoming Judge deprived the appellant and of course himself of the opinion of the two assessors who had at least seen and heard the prosecution witnesses and the appellant…

…Nonetheless, counsel for the respondent submitted that the intended appeal will only delay the prosecution of H.C.C.C.…

…Whether or not such an appeal will turn on a serious issue or it will only serve to delay the prosecution of the suit in the superior court is not possible to say with any amount of firmness as there is insufficient material…

…That was for the prosecution to prove. The blood-stain could have come from a person other than the deceased.…

…But in the court, the prosecution did not put forward any reason why the deceased’s blood must be on the back of the appellant’s shirt if indeed it was his shirt. Blood stains are circumstantial evidence.…

…iii) of the Act provides as follows: “185(d)(iii) Any person who acquires, has in his possession, …, any goods which he knows, or ought reasonably to have known to be uncustomed goods, shall be guilty of an offence …” The prosecution…

…The two lower courts found that the appellant was in possession of the goods on his own admission, and the prosecution proved that the goods in question were dutiable.…

…The trial magistrate after outlining the evidence of the prosecution witness as stated that he believed their evidence but gave no reason for believing it apart from saying that they had nor reason for lying.…

…It was after the trial magistrate had considered and decided on the prosecution evidence, that he rejected the defences as false, again without giving any reasons.…

…The trial magistrate after outlining the evidence of the prosecution witness as stated that he believed their evidence but gave no reason for believing it apart from saying that they had nor reason for lying.…

…It was after the trial magistrate had considered and decided on the prosecution evidence, that he rejected the defences as false, again without giving any reasons.…

…In his grounds of appeal to the High court the appellant complained that the prosecution evidence against him was fabricated lies and unreliable.…

…The key prosecution witnesses were Richard Ng’eno (PW 1) and Peter Munyao (PW 2). Richard was supposed to be the one who saw the appellant lock himself in the toilet and then he called Peter.…