[1987] KEHC 57 (KLR)
The court found that the identification of the appellant by the complainant's girlfriend was credible, as she had prior knowledge of the appellant and observed him during the robbery. The complainant's identification of his shoes, based on a unique metal feature, further corroborated the prosecution's case. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1987] KEHC 57 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Kithuku; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 267 of 1986
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld
- Judges
- A Mohammed
- Legal Topics
- Robbery, Identification Evidence, Alibi Defence
- 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
Kithuku
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant was properly identified as one of the robbers during the incident.
- 2 Whether the appellant's alibi defence was credible and sufficient to raise reasonable doubt.
- 3 Whether the conviction was supported by the evidence, particularly regarding the ownership of the stolen shoes.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the identification of the appellant by the complainant's girlfriend was credible, as she had prior knowledge of the appellant and observed him during the robbery. The complainant's identification of his shoes, based on a unique metal feature, further corroborated the prosecution's case. The appellant's alibi was not credible, as it was inconsistent with the evidence regarding the timing and possession of the stolen shoes. The trial magistrate properly accepted the identification evidence and rejected the alibi. The conviction was supported by the evidence, and the sentence imposed was fair and reasonable. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The conviction and sentence of the trial court are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MACHAKOS
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 267 OF 1986
KITHUKU………,……………….………APPELLANT
V
REPUBLIC…………………………………..RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
The appellant was convicted by the learned resident magistrate of robbery contrary to section 296(1) of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment together with two strokes and was ordered to be under police supervision for five years.
In the early hours of May 1, 1986, the complainant and his girlfriend where returning from labour day dance at the Multi Purpose Hall in Kitui Township when they were robbed of their monies, wrist watch oft he complainant and their pairs of shoes by a gang of three robbers armed with panga and simis. The complainant who was drunk was unable to identify any of the robbers. The girlfriend identified the appellant by the light of torch shone on him and the complainant whilst the appellant was making search of the complainant. She had known the appellant physically was she used to see him in Kitui Township.
On May 11, 1986, the complainant who was in company of a police officer found the appellant wearing his shoes. These were caused to be removed and closely scrutinized by the complainant. He identified the same by metal on the sole which he had caused to be removed.
The appellant in his sworn testimony claimed that the pair of shoes were given to him by a friend in Mombasa on April 29 1986. This could not be possible if the shoes belonged to the complainant. The learned trial magistrate properly accepted the identification by the complainant of his pair of shoes which were stolen from him during the night of robbery on May, 1, 1986. The appellant’s ground of appeal is alibi and that the pair of shoes are his which he bought from someone in Mombasa on April 29, 1986.
Upon consideration of all the evidence before the trial court, I am satisfied that the appellant was properly convicted. The sentence was fair and reasonable. The appeal is dismissed.
Dated and delivered at Machakos this 8th day of March 1987.
ABDULLAH
JUDGE