[2001] KEHC 68 (KLR)
The court found that the O.B. entries from Diani Police Station did not mention the appellant's name or provide a description that could relate to him, supporting the appellant's claim that his identity was not established in the earliest report. The court held that, under Section 358 of the Criminal Procedure Code,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2001] KEHC 68 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Hassan Hamadi Abdalla; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 230 of ??
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application to Adduce Additional Evidence on Appeal
- Outcome
- Application to adduce additional evidence allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Adducing Additional Evidence, Criminal Appeal Procedure, Identification Evidence
- 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
Hassan Hamadi Abdalla
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application to Adduce Additional Evidence on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant should be allowed to adduce new evidence in the form of the Occurrence Book (O.B.) entries from Diani Police Station.
- 2 Whether the O.B. entries are relevant to the issue of the appellant's identification and arrest.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the O.B. entries from Diani Police Station did not mention the appellant's name or provide a description that could relate to him, supporting the appellant's claim that his identity was not established in the earliest report. The court held that, under Section 358 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it was appropriate to allow the appellant to adduce this new evidence. The court directed that the O.B. entries be introduced through the trial court in accordance with the prescribed procedure, after which the appeal would be set for hearing.
Court Disposition
Application to adduce additional evidence allowed.
Orders
- The appellant is allowed to have the O.B. entries put in as evidence under Section 358 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The trial court file (Mombasa Criminal Case No. 3822 of 1999) is to be returned to the trial court for compliance with Section 358(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPULIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYAAT MOMBASACRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 230 OF 2000
HASSAN HAMADI ABDALLA …………………………… APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC ………………………………………………. RESPONDENT
RULING
The appellant has applied to this court that he be allowed to put in anew piece of evidence that is an O.B. of Diani Police Station in respect of entries related to the earliest report made to the police as touching his identity and arrest. He states that the complainant’s lied to the trial court about him and that even in their earliest report his name or description of his identity was not given to the police.
This court has examined the O.B. entries numbers:-
3 of 18. 11. 99
7 of 18. 11. 99
54 of 19. 11. 99 and
67 of 19. 11. 99
The entries do not reveal that the complainant or anybody on his behalf, who reported to the Diani Police Station, mentioned his name or gave a description of identity which could relate to him. This court rules therefore that the appellant be allowed to have the O.B. referred to above put in under S. 358 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The same be done through the trial court in the normal way.
ORDER
Let the trial court Mombasa Criminal Case No. 3822 of 1999, file be returned the court that tried it and let the trial Magistrate or another Magistrate n his behalf comply with S. 358 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and of S. 358 of Criminal Procedure Code as whole. Thereafter the file should be returned to this court for the fixing of this appeal for a hearing. Dated and delivered this 29th day of November, 2001.
D. A. ONYANCHA JUDGE