Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Criminal Appeal 63 of 1994 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | George Itiotia Karuku v Republic |
| Date Delivered: | 18 Jul 1994 |
| Case Class: | Criminal |
| Court: | Court of Appeal at Mombasa |
| Case Action: | Judgment |
| Judge(s): | Riaga Samuel Cornelius Omolo, Akilano Molade Akiwumi, John Mwangi Gachuhi |
| Citation: | George Itiotia Karuku v Republic [1994] eKLR |
| Case History: | (Appeal from a Judgment, Order, or as the case may be) of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Mr. Justice T. Mbaluto) dated 15th October, 1993 IN H.C.CR.A. NO. 261 OF 1993) |
| Court Division: | Criminal |
| Parties Profile: | Individual v Government |
| County: | Mombasa |
| History Docket No: | 261 of 1993 |
| History Judges: | Tom Mbaluto |
| History County: | Mombasa |
| Case Outcome: | Appeal Dismissed. |
| Disclaimer: | The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information |
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA
AT MOMBASA
CRIMINAL APPEAL 63 OF 1994
GEORGE ITIOTIA KARUKU………………………............…..APPELLANT
AND
REPUBLIC……………………......................................…RESPONDENT
(Appeal from a Judgment, Order, or as the case may be) of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Mr. Justice T. Mbaluto) dated 15th October, 1993
IN
H.C.CR.A. NO. 261 OF 1993)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
This is an appeal from the decision of the High Court in which the learned judge upheld the finding of the Magistrate to the effect that the appellant had knowingly disposed of by selling, and thereby committing the offence of stealing parts of an aircraft, which he well knew did not belong to him or to his superior whom he alleged, had asked him to cut up the aircraft. He also upheld the Magistrate's conclusion that the defence of "superior orders" was in the particular circumstances of the case, unavailable to the appellant. Even if the appellant's superior had instructed the appellant as alleged by the appellant, there was sufficient independent evidence which established that the appellant disposed of parts of the aircraft knowing full well that this was without the consent of owner of the aircraft.
We have there two concurrent findings of fact with which more over, we are in full agreement.
The appellant's grounds of appeal is to the effect that he did not demolish the aircraft on his own and sold the parts on the instructions of his superior. It may be well be that the appellant thought that the aircraft had been abandoned, but the circumstances of the case show clearly that this is not a case of "finders Keepers" on the basis of the concurrent finding of fact, we cannot but agree with the learned judge that the defence of "superior orders", as was indeed the same conclusion that the magistrate came to, cannot avail the appellant.
In the result, we cannot but come to the conclusion that the appeal must be dismissed.
It is so ordered.
Dated and delivered at Mombasa this 18th day of July, 1994
J.M. GACHUHI
…………………………
JUDGE OF APPEAL
R.S.C. OMOLO
…………………………
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A.M. AKIWUMI
……………………….
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
Please Wait. Searching ...