Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Criminal Appeal 18 of 2006 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | HOSEA BABU CHACHA v REPUBLIC |
| Date Delivered: | 09 Nov 2006 |
| Case Class: | Criminal |
| Court: | High Court at Kisii |
| Case Action: | Judgment |
| Judge(s): | Kaburu Bauni |
| Citation: | HOSEA BABU CHACHA v REPUBLIC [2006] eKLR |
| Advocates: | Mr. Chirchir for the respondent Appellant present in person |
| Case History: | (From original conviction and sentence of the Resident Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No.1215 of 2005 at Kehancha – M. K. K. SEREM ESQ., R.M) |
| Advocates: | Mr. Chirchir for the respondent Appellant present in person |
| Case Summary: | Criminal practice and procedure-appeal-appeal against conviction and sentence-whether the evidence adduced was sufficient to secure a conviction-whether the sentence was harsh and excessive in the circumstances of the case-whether the appeal had merit-Penal Code sections 253 (b), 322 (2) |
| 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
OF KISII
Criminal Appeal 18 of 2006
HOSEA BABU CHACHA ……………….….………….. APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC …………………..…………..….………… RESPONDENT
(From original conviction and sentence of the Resident Magistrate’s Court Criminal
Case No.1215 of 2005 at Kehancha – M. K. K. SEREM ESQ., R.M)
JUDGMENT
The appellant was convicted for the offence of handling stolen property contrary to S.322(2) P.C. and that of resisting arrest by a Police Officer contrary to S.253(b) P.C. He was sentenced to 10 years and 5 years imprisonment respectively.
Prosecution case was that the complainant’s two red bulls and one red cow were stolen the night of 14th and 15th December 2005. He raised an alarm and neighbours joined in the search. Report was also made to the Anti-stock theft unit. The search team met with accused who shot arrows at them. He was however arrested. He led them to a maize farm where the red cow was tied. While there he escaped and ran away. He was chased and arrested. He was charged with the two offences.
Appellant denied the charges and said the stolen animal was planted on him.
I have considered the appeal. The conviction was proper. In fact the appellant should have been convicted on the main charge of stock theft if the trial court considered the doctrine of recent possession. The stolen animal was found early the next day. It was the appellant who led the chief, members of public to where the cow was tied in the maize plantation.
He knew where it was. He had tried to escape but was cornered.
When police found the appellant first he shot at them to avoid arrest.
They had to shoot in the air before he was arrested.
I therefore find the conviction was proper.
However I find the sentence of 10 years and 5 years respectively to be harsh and excessive. The animal appellant was found with was valued at shs.10,000/=. It was recovered. The appellant stated that he was an orphan. He too was a first offender. Both sentences were harsh. I therefore set the sentence aside and substitute them with that of one (1) year imprisonment in each count to run concurrently from the date of the conviction.
Dated 9th November 2006
KABURU BAUNI
JUDGE
Delivered in presence of
cc. Mobisa
Mr. Chirchir for state
Appellant present in person.
Please Wait. Searching ...