Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Criminal Appeal 5 of 1990 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | Kamanja v Republic |
| Date Delivered: | 12 Oct 1990 |
| Case Class: | Criminal |
| Court: | High Court at Nyeri |
| Case Action: | Judgment |
| Judge(s): | Philip Kiptoo Tunoi |
| Citation: | Kamanja v Republic [1990] eKLR |
| Court Division: | Criminal |
| County: | Nyeri |
| Case Summary: | Kamanja v Republic High Court, at Nyeri October 12, 1990 Tunoi J Criminal Appeal No 5 of 1990 (Appeal from a Judgment of the Senior Resident Magistrate’s Court at Nyeri, FN Muche Ag SRM Esq, in Criminal Case No 817 of 1989) Evidence – Witness evidence – recognition and identification – factors aiding recognition identification. The appellant was convicted of the offence of robbery on the strength of recognition and identification evidence. The appellant on appeal argued that he was not properly recognised. The appellant was well known to the complainant who had given him a lift and employed him as a casual labourer. The appellant and complainant had also conversed before the incident and were drinking mates. During the incident the appellant spoke and was recognised by voice. The witnesses further recognised the appellant by moonlight and torch light and promptly identified the appellant as the attacker to the police. Held: On the evidence the court came to the right conclusion and was justified in convicting the appellant and rejecting his evidence. The witnesses had more than enough opportunity in seeing the appellant and recognising his voice. Cases No cases referred to. Statutes Penal Code (cap 63) section 296(1) |
| 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 |
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT AT NYERI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 5 OF 1990
KAMANJA……………………... APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC…..…………………RESPONDENT
(Appeal from a Judgment of the Senior Resident Magistrate’s Court at
Nyeri, FN Muche Ag SRM Esq, in Criminal Case No 817 of 1989)
JUDGMENT
The appellant was convicted of robbery contrary to section 296(1) of the Penal Code.
The complainant and his family were attacked in their village at 1 am on the material night while asleep.
The gravamen of this appeal is recognition. The appellant argues that he was not properly recognised and that there were contradictions in the evidence of the material witnesses.
In my view, the learned trial magistrate in her well reasoned judgment came to the right conclusion in convicting the appellant as charged.
The appellant was well-known to complainant. They had talked and conversed before the incident. The complainant had given him a lift and had employed him as a casual labourer. They were drinking mates. During the incident the appellant spoke. There was therefore recognition by voice.
PW II knew the appellant before. There was moonlight. She recognized him as he was entering the house. PW III saw him by means of reflected torch lights.
These witnesses informed the police soon thereafter that they had been attacked and robbed by the appellant.
In his testimony the appellant denied the charge. He averred that he was a sleep throughout the night in his house.
The learned trial magistrate accepted the evidence of the prosecution witnesses as true. She rejected that of the appellant. She was justified in doing so. The witnesses had more than enough opportunity in seeing the appellant and recognising his voice. They were not hesitant in informing the police of his identity. The appellant was properly convicted. The grounds of appeal have no merit and are rejected.
The appeal against the conviction is dismissed. The prison term and the reporting order are legal and not excessive.
Appeal dismissed.
Dated and Delivered at Nyeri this 12th Day of October, 1990
P.K. TUNOI
…………..
JUDGE
Please Wait. Searching ...