[2008] KEHC 2528 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant was apprehended in possession of the complainant's stolen mobile phone immediately after the theft, and that the evidence of the complainant was corroborated by other prosecution witnesses. The appellant's denial was found to be unconvincing. The court held that the prosecution had...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2008] KEHC 2528 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Julius Ndiri Maji; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 13 of 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld
- Legal Topics
- Stealing From Person, Standard of Proof, Credibility of Witnesses, Criminal Sentencing
- 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
Julius Ndiri Maji
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction was based on credible and sufficient evidence.
- 2 Whether the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
- 3 Whether the appellant was denied a fair opportunity to prepare his defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant was apprehended in possession of the complainant's stolen mobile phone immediately after the theft, and that the evidence of the complainant was corroborated by other prosecution witnesses. The appellant's denial was found to be unconvincing. The court held that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and that there was no basis to interfere with the conviction or the sentence imposed, which was within the statutory limits and not excessive.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The conviction and sentence of five years imprisonment are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT EMBU
Criminal Case 13 of 2006
JULIUS NDIRI MAJI…………………………………….APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC……………………………………………RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
The appellant was charged tried and convicted on a charge of stealing from a person contrary to Section 279 (a) of Penal Code and was sentence to imprisonment for a period of 5 years.
He has filed 5 grounds of appeal namely:-
1. that the Trial Magistrate failed to consider the probability of PW1 & PW8 framing the charge against him.
2. and he was not given a chance to prepare the case.
3. that the conviction was based on evidence that could not meet the standard.
4. Also that the prosecution did not proof its case beyond reasonable doubt.
5. And that the evidence of Pw1 was not reliable and was not water tight.
The prosecution evidence was led by PW1 Susan Gichugu the complainant. She had a cell phone in her handbag. It was about to rain and people crowded the corridor at D.O’s office. The appellant was standing next to the complainant. She wanted to make a call but when she opened her handbag she found phone was missing. As she was inquiring from Appellant of her phone, the phone rung from his coat pocket. Then a former Assistant chief was nearby. He grabbed the appellant to the police office. There the appellant was searched and the complainant mobile phone was recovered. The complainant’s evidence was supported by that of PW2 former Assistant Chief Nephat Muchiri Njiru and P3 police officer James Gikonyo Chege.
On the part of the Appellant he made unsworn statement and put himself in the scene at D.O’s office and having met the complainant and the former Assistant Chief. He denied the offence.
Upon considering the evidence of prosecution and the statement of appellant I find that the appellant was arrested red-handed as it were and his defence is a charm and unbelievable.
It is my finding that the prosecution has proved its case beyond any reasonable doubt and I do not interfered with conviction. On the issue of sentence he was sentenced to five years imprisonment. The maximum sentence is fourteen years. I do not find 5 years excessive or harsh. The appeal is dismissed.
Dated this 14th May, 2008.
J. N. KHAMINWA
JUDGE