[2019] KEHC 8376 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 8376 (KLR)

The conviction for defilement was unsafe and could not be sustained because the complainant, who was the key prosecution witness, recanted her testimony and admitted under oath that her original evidence was untruthful. The additional evidence taken on appeal, including the complainant's letter and oral testimony,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 8376 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: AJC; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kabarnet
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal 54 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside; appellant acquitted and released
Judges
EM Muriithi
Legal Topics
Defilement, Sexual Offences Act, False Testimony, Criminal Appeal, Acquittal, Perjury
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Defilement Sexual Offences Act False Testimony Criminal Appeal Acquittal Perjury

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AJC

Appellant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for defilement was safe in light of the recantation of the complainant's testimony.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to an acquittal based on the new evidence adduced on appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the complainant's admission of lying under oath warranted further action.

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction for defilement was unsafe and could not be sustained because the complainant, who was the key prosecution witness, recanted her testimony and admitted under oath that her original evidence was untruthful. The additional evidence taken on appeal, including the complainant's letter and oral testimony, established that the appellant did not commit the offence. The prosecution, through the DPP, conceded the appeal, and the court found that the benefit of doubt must be given to the appellant. The court further noted that the complainant's admission of lying under oath constituted an offence under section 19(2) of the Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act, and directed that the...

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside; appellant acquitted and released

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The appellant is acquitted of the charge of defilement contrary to section 8(1) as read with 8(3) of the Sexual Offences Act.