[2005] KEHC 989 (KLR)
The court found that the evidence on record, including the testimony of the complainant and corroborating witnesses, as well as medical evidence, was sufficient to support the conviction for assault causing actual bodily harm. The court rejected the suggestion that the assault was fabricated due to a land dispute,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KEHC 989 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Alexander Maina Ndirangu; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 203 of 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal against conviction and sentence on count one dismissed; appeal against conviction and sentence on count two allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Assault Causing Actual Bodily Harm, Malicious Damage to Property, Penal Code Offences, Criminal Appeals
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Alexander Maina Ndirangu
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for assault causing actual bodily harm was supported by sufficient evidence.
- 2 Whether the conviction for malicious damage to property was proper in light of the facts and law.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the evidence on record, including the testimony of the complainant and corroborating witnesses, as well as medical evidence, was sufficient to support the conviction for assault causing actual bodily harm. The court rejected the suggestion that the assault was fabricated due to a land dispute, finding no evidence of a frame-up. However, the court agreed with the State Counsel that the second count of malicious damage to property was redundant, as the facts underlying that count were already encompassed within the assault charge. Consequently, the conviction and sentence on count one (assault) were upheld, while the conviction and sentence on count two (malicious...
Court Disposition
Appeal against conviction and sentence on count one dismissed; appeal against conviction and sentence on count two allowed.
Orders
- Conviction and sentence on count one (assault causing actual bodily harm) upheld.
- Conviction and sentence on count two (malicious damage to property) quashed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYERI
Criminal Appeal 203 of 2003
ALEXANDER MAINA NDIRANGU………………….……..…APPELLANT
Versus
REPUBLIC…………………………………………………….RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the judgment of R. N.
Muriuki, Resident Magistrate, dated 16th June 2003,
in the Resident Magistrate’s Court at Kangema,
Criminal Case No. 168 of 2003)
JUDGMENT
The Appellant was charged with assault causing actual bodily harm contrary to Section 251 of the Penal Code particulars alleging that on 20th February 2003 at Kagumoini Village in Muranga District the Appellant unlawfully assaulted Lydiah Njeri Maina thereby occasioning her actual bodily harm.
In the second count the Appellant was charged with malicious damage to property contrary to Section 339(1) of the Penal Code, particulars alleging that on the 20th February 2003 at Kagumoini Village in Muranga District within Central Province, the Appellant willfully and unlawfully destroyed or damaged one blouse valued at Ksh.200/= the property of Lydiah Njeri Maina.
The Appellant was convicted of each count and fined and paid the fine. Has appealed against the conviction and sentences.
I have looked at the recorded evidence in the light of submissions before me during the hearing. I find there was sufficient evidence proving assault by the Appellant against the Complainant – Lydiah Njeri Maina, in this matter where there is an unresolved land dispute between the Appellant and the Complainant’s family. There is no evidence of a framed up assault case. There is medical evidence supporting the offence of assault. The parties are relatives. Incident during the day and there was the evidence of P.W.3 to support what P.W.1 said concerning the assault incident.
I, however, agree with what Mr. Orinda, State Counsel, said to the effect that count two ought not to have been there as count one covered sufficiently all that which happened during the assault.
In the circumstances, I do hereby dismiss the Appellant’s appeal against his conviction and sentence in count one.
I, however, do allow his appeal against the conviction and sentence in count two.
Quash the conviction on count two and set aside the sentence on count two. The fine of Ksh.2000/=, if paid, be refunded to the Appellant.
Dated this 20th December 2005
J. M. KHAMONI
JUDGE
Present:
Appellant In Person
M/S Ngalyuka for the Republic
Gikaria Court Clerk