Sayyid Ahmed Mohamed  v Republic

Court of Appeal, at Mombasa July 30, 1992

Gachuhi, Masime & Gicheru JJ A

Criminal Appeal No 41 of 1992

(Appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Justice Shields) dated 31st January 1992 in HCCRA No 28 of 1991)

Criminal Practice and Procedure- evidence - judge having doubts about a case but not disclosing the nature of the doubts - whether conviction can stand.

The appellant was convicted of the offence of giving false information to a person employed in the public service and sentenced to 8 months imprisonment.

His first appeal to the High Court on conviction was dismissed. However, sentence was reduced to a fine of Kshs 1,100/= or one month’s imprisonment in default.

In dismissing the appeal, the learned High Court judge remarked that he had doubts about the case but did not disclose the nature of his doubts.

Held:

1. In the absence of any explanation, the learned judge erred because it is trite law that the appellant should have benefited from those doubts and allow the appellant’s appeal.

Appeal allowed.

Cases

No cases referred to.

Statutes

Penal Code (cap 63) section 129(a)

Advocates

Mr Gakuhi for the Appellant