Search court decisions

…And that its the Prosecution that had misled him into admitting the offence. He says he was denied an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. The appeal was opposed by the State.…

…There is no allegation in the supporting affidavit that the Judgment-Debtor cannot afford to deposit the decretal sum as ordered, or that such deposit will so affect its operations as to amount to a fetter on prosecution…

…Upon a consideration of the evidence the trial magistrate believed the prosecution witnesses but not the evidence of the appellant or his witness or indeed the statutory statement of Makau Mulei and convicted the appellant…

…The learned trial magistrate believed the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and convicted the appellant on the five counts in respect of which he was tried.…

…The court prosecution opposed the attempt to change the plea and the Chief Magistrate reserved his ruling to 21.1.90 when he rejected the request to change the plea and convicted the appellant as charged in count 1 and sentenced…

…As regards the truthfulness of prosecution witnesses and whether they were driven by sinister motives to implicate the appellant, the learned magistrate had opportunity to observe these witnesses, and form his own opinion…

…Briefly, the prosecution case in respect of the first count was that on the 27th of September, 1987 at about 10 pm, Snr Private Stephen Muganda (PW 1) of the 7th Kenya Rifles Battalion, Langata Barracks was guarding the magazine…

…He then revealed to the Director of CID the truth relating to the circumstances of his arrest and prosecution in the espionage charge.…

…Briefly, the prosecution case was that on the night of 7th of October, 1990 while the complainant, Anastasia Wambui Ngethe (PW 2) and her husband, Francis Ngethe Mwangi (PW1) were sleeping in their house within Othaya township…

…The trial court failed to grasp clearly that the evidence of identification that was relied upon by the prosecution in this case was basically single witness identification.…

….…….4TH DEFENDANT RULING The first and second defendants have pending before court a Notice of Motion dated 27th July 2006 seeking the dismissal of this suit for want of prosecution.…

…The case for the prosecution was, in outline, as follows. The complainant, the appellant, his co-accused and other patrons were at Heshima Bar taking beer at the back room.…

…A total of 12 witnesses testified for the prosecution. All the accused persons gave unsworn evidence and called no witnesses.…

…This confirms the evidence of the prosecution that he gained entry through the roof and when he was told to come out the way he had gotten in and he came out through the roof.…

…The evidence relied upon by the prosecution to prove that this photocopy certificate was a forgery was overwhelming.…

…Briefly, the prosecution case was that on the 16th of October, 1989, Silvan Joseph Odero (PW1) who was then the Deputy Director of Personnel Administration in the Directorate of Personnel Management (DPM), received a phone…

…By the bringing of the application to substitute the plaintiff it was made clear both to the Court and the defendant that the estate of the deceased plaintiff was desirous of continuing the prosecution of the cause of action…

…The prosecution case was mainly based on the testimony of William Kiti Waita (PW 1). The witness is the KANU Chairman for Khoko Sub-location of Matungulu Location in Yatta Divison.…

…The respondent should not be penalized for the appellant’s tardiness when it had in fact applied to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution at one stage.…

…Therefore there was not the slightest doubt that the appellant had no right to attempt to obtain possession in the way so graphically described in the evidence of the complainant and the witnesses for the prosecution: there…

…I will however proceed to refer to the receipts that were relied upon in the prosecution’s case.…

…This was a case which was easy for the prosecution to prove had there been good investigation coupled with a keen handling.…

…Their petitions of appeal, filed on the July 23, 1984, each contained lengthy grounds, but in particular attacked their respective identifications by the prosecution witnesses, upon which of course, their convictions mainly…

…He does not say in which trafficcase and the result of the prosecution.…