[2002] KEHC 374 (KLR)
The court found that the identification of the appellant was reliable and free from the possibility of mistaken identity, as the witnesses never lost sight of him during the chase and he was seen with the pistol before discarding it. The direct evidence of the witnesses, coupled with the recovery and examination of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2002] KEHC 374 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: John Kinyanjui Kabuga; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 72 of 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Attempted Robbery, Identification Evidence, Possession of Firearms, Possession of Ammunition
- 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
John Kinyanjui Kabuga
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant was properly identified as one of the offenders at the scene of the attempted robbery.
- 2 Whether the prosecution proved the appellant's possession of the firearm and ammunition beyond reasonable doubt.
- 3 Whether the convictions and sentences were supported by the evidence adduced.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the identification of the appellant was reliable and free from the possibility of mistaken identity, as the witnesses never lost sight of him during the chase and he was seen with the pistol before discarding it. The direct evidence of the witnesses, coupled with the recovery and examination of the firearm and ammunition, established the appellant's involvement in the offences beyond reasonable doubt. The trial magistrate's findings were upheld, and the court concluded that the offences were proved beyond reasonable doubt, warranting dismissal of the appeal.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- Convictions and sentences of the lower court are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 72 OF 1997
FROM ORIGINAL CONVICTION AND SENTENCE IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 14475 OF 1995 OF SENIOR PRINCIPAL MAGISTRATE KIBERA
JOHN KINYANJUI KABUGA………………………………..APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC………………………………………………….RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
The appellant was charged with three offences. In count one he was charged with attempted robbery c/s 297(2) of the Penal Code. The particulars were that, on 28th September, 1995 along 2nd Parklands Avenue, Nairobi, jointly with others not before court and being armed with a dangerous weapon, namely a pistol, they attempted to rob Mrs Sarla Shah of her car Reg No. KAC 093W Toyota Sprinter saloon valued at Kshs. 1. 2million.
Counts two and three related to possession of firearm and ammunition respectively without a firearm certificate. Having denied the offences, a full trial followed after which he was convicted of all the three offences. In count one he was sentenced to death while on counts two and three he was sentenced to serve three years imprisonment, respectively and sentences ordered to run consecutively.
Aggrieved by the said convictions, the appellant filed an appeal. In his petition appeal, the appellant has challenged his conviction on the basis of suspect identification both at he scen of the alleged offence, the scne of h is arrest and in court. He has also contended that, the firearm and ammunition actual and constructive possession.
It is true hat the complainant did not identify the people who attempted to rob her of her car. However, when she raised an alarm, members of the public and one motorist gave chase and eventually one suspect was arrested.
The offences took place at about 2. 00p.m. one of the people who responded to the alarm raised by the complainant weas pw2 Edward Kimondia Agesa. He heared hooting and screams form a motor vehicle. He then looked and saw an Asian woman screaming and pointing at a direction where people were running. He joined the chase two of those people managed to escape but one was arrested/apprehended. It is the evidence of this witness that, when this suspect was arrested he was still running and he (the witness) never lost sight of him at all during he chase. He did not find him with anything and was also not able to identify him in court due to lapse of time.
Masika Ngulo worked with Agesa and he too joined in the chase. While chasing the suspects, one of them was knocked by a motor vehicle and a pistol fell down. When this was happening Ngulo was 5 metres away. The man continued to run but was apprehended soon after. He identified that man as the appellant herein.
The man who was driving the motor vehicle that knocked down one of suspects was one Shirehachan G. Shah. His evidence is that he heard people shou5t “thief” “thief” and saw four people running along mpaka road. He followed. One had a pistol in the left hand and running very fast. He followed this man and tried to hit him with his motor vehicle. At that time he threw away the pistol. The motorist had a whistle which he continued to blow. With the help of members of public the suspect was arrested. He identified the man as the appellant.
The firearm and ammunition were examined and a report submitted in evidence.
The appellant in his defence denied involvement in these offences. Eh said he was on his way to a bus stage to take means to the town to buy provisions when he met a group of people only to be accused of being one of the suspects.
The learned trial magistrate believed the identifying witnesses in that they never lost sight with the appellant. Also, the fact that he was seen with the pistol before he threw it down connected him with the offence. She said:
“It was daylight and the accused was chased and arrested when he threw away the firearm. I find there was on possibility of mistaken identity as pw2 and pw5 never lost sight of the accused who had a pistol during he chase until when he was arrested.”
With respect, we agree with the learned trial magistrate in her conclusion in view of the evidences adduced. This was direct evidence. The appellant was spotted soon after the complainant raised an alarm. He was running alongside others who disappeared. He was seen at close range by both pw3 and pw5. The conclusion was therefore irresistible.
The offences were proved beyond reasonable doubt. This appeal must therefore fail. The same is dismissed.
Order accordingly
Right of appeal explained.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 25th day of September, 2002
MBOGHOLI MSAGHA
JUDGE
G. MBITO
JUDGE