Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Criminal Appeal 254 of 1993 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | Geoffrey Kamuti Munyao v Republic |
| Date Delivered: | 04 Sep 1995 |
| Case Class: | Criminal |
| Court: | High Court at Mombasa |
| Case Action: | Judgment |
| Judge(s): | Samwel Odhiambo Oguk |
| Citation: | Geoffrey Kamuti Munyao v Republic [1995] eKLR |
| Court Division: | Criminal |
| Parties Profile: | Individual v Government |
| County: | Mombasa |
| Case Summary: | Geoffrey Kamuti Munyao v Republic High Court, at Mombasa September 4, 1995 Oguk, J Criminal Appeal No 254 of 1993 Evidence – standard of proof – where one is convicted based on safe and reliable evidence – whether conviction is safe. Sentencing – appeal against sentence – where one is sentenced to 5 years with 8 strokes for shop breaking – where large part of stolen good had been recovered – whether sentence harsh and excessive. Summary of The Facts The appellant was convicted after trial by 1st class District Magistrate, Taveta of the offence of Shop-breaking and committing a felony contrary to section 306 (a) of Penal Code. He was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment and to receive 8 strokes of cane. He then appeal against conviction and sentence. The appellant is said to have approached one Francis Chalia that he keeps for them luggage which they had. PW3 came across the appellant carrying a carton box, but left the carton and ran, leaving behind jacket with 6 weighing stones. His companions were arrested and led police to house of PW2 where they had kept stolen goods. The appellant was finally arrested and PW identified him as one of men who had left baggage containing stolen items. In his defence, the appellant stated simply that he had nothing to do with the said theft. Held:
Appeal against conviction dismissed.
|
| Case Outcome: | Appeal against conviction 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 |
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 254 OF 1993
GEOFFREY KAMUTI MUNYAO …………..APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC…………………............…….RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
The appellant, Geoffrey Kamuti Munyao, was convicted after trial by the learned 1st Class District Magistrate, Taveta of the offence of shop-breaking and committing a felony contrary to section 306(a) of the Penal Code. Upon his conviction, he was sentenced to serve 5 years’ imprisonment and ordered to receive 8 strokes of the cane. His appeal to this court is against conviction and sentence.
The evidence adduced in the court below is well set out in the Judgment of the learned trial Magistrate.
There is no dispute on such evidence that the shop of the complainant at Challa Trading Centre was broken into on the night of 29th and 30th November, 1991 and several shop goods valued at Kshs 30,000/= stolen from therein. On the following morning, the Appellant in company of two others posing as police officers approached one Francis Chalia (PW2) at his house with a request that he keeps for them the luggage, which they had. That baggage contained several shop goods. He agreed believeing that the men were police officers.
On the same day, Pc. Johnstone Kabubei (PW.3) of Taveta Police Station came across the Appellant while carrying a carton box. He challenged him to stop and they did so and put down the said carton box. The Appellant then removed the jacket he was wearing and left it behind as he took to his heels, but his two companions were detained by the Police Officer. Inside the carton, which they had, there were several shop goods and inside the pockets of the Appellant’s jacket, there were 6 weighing stones. All of these items were identified by the complainant as part of the items that had been stolen from his shop on the previous night. It was after the arrest of the Appellant’s companions that they led the police officers to the house of PW.2 where they had kept part of the stolen items which were similarly identified by the complainant. The Appellant was finally arrested and PW2. Identified him as one of the 3 men who left the baggage containing the stolen items at his house. PW.3 also recognized him as the man who had ran away leaving behind the jacket containing the stolen weighing stones and other stolen items in a carton box.
The defence of the Appellant was simply that he had nothing to do with the said theft at the complainant’s shop and that nothing was actually found in his possession.
The learned trial Magistrate in a carefully written Judgment disbelieved the Appellant that he had been framed and convicted him of the charge. Upon my own evaluation and consideration of the recorded evidence, I am satisfied that the conviction of the Appellant was based on sound and reliable evidence. There was evidence coming from PW.2 and PW.3 that he and 2 others who had earlier been arrested were the ones who had in their possession the stolen items from the complainant’s shop.
This was just within a day of the said theft.
I as satisfied that the conviction of the Appellant was quite safe. I dismiss his appeal against same conviction.
The sentence of 5 years with 8 strokes in my view, was manifestly excessive. Even though the offence was serious, large parts of the stolen goods were recovered. I allow the appeal sentence. I set aside the sentence that was imposed and substitute thereof a sentence of 3 ½ years imprisonment with 3 strokes corporal punishment.
In the result, the appeal against conviction is dismissed while the appeal against sentence is allowed as hereinabove stated.
Dated and delivered at Mombasa this 4th day of September, 1995
S.O. OGUK
JUDGE
Please Wait. Searching ...