[1987] KEHC 26 (KLR)
The court found that the trial magistrate was entitled to rely on the sole evidence of PW 2, who credibly testified that the appellant picked up the sewing machine before disappearing. The appellant's explanation was not believed, and the trial magistrate's assessment of witness credibility was upheld. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1987] KEHC 26 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Otieno; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 347 of 1987
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- DC Porter
- Legal Topics
- Theft by Servant, Evidence Assessment, Credibility of Witnesses
- 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
Otieno
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for theft by servant was supported by credible evidence.
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial magistrate was entitled to rely on the sole evidence of PW 2, who credibly testified that the appellant picked up the sewing machine before disappearing. The appellant's explanation was not believed, and the trial magistrate's assessment of witness credibility was upheld. The conviction was deemed safe. The sentence of one year was not manifestly excessive, particularly as the stolen goods were not recovered. Accordingly, there was no basis for appellate interference with either conviction or sentence.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 347 OF 1987
OTIENO …………………….APPELLANTS
VERSUS
REPUBLIC…………….……RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
November 19, 1987 Porter JA delivered the following Judgment.
The appellant was convicted in the court below for theft by servant contrary to section 281 of the Penal Code after trial and sentenced to 1 year’s imprisonment.
He now appeals against conviction and sentence.
The appellant had been working for the complainant for 11 days as a tailor.
The complainant hired a sewing machine from the employer of PW 2, and the machine was picked up every morning by one of the fundis of the complainant. PW 2 used to take it to a kiosk for them to do that.
On November 4, 1986 PW 2 saw the appellant come to pick up the machine earlier than was usual, and he disappeared with it until he was arrested near his home in South Nyanza more than 6 weeks later.
The appellant denied having picked up the machine and said he had gone home after being paid to see after a sick brother, and then could not get back to Nairobi as he had no money.
The trial magistrate who saw the witnesses giving evidence and was able to assess their conduct was prepared to rely on the sole evidence of PW 2 as to the picking up of the machine, and pointed out that the appellant had disappeared at the time. In fact the appellant explained that although permission after only 11 days of work, but there was still the evidence of PW 2 which the trial magistrate believed that he had picked up the machine before he went. On my own assessment of the record has right to believe the evidence of PW 2 and so this conviction was safe and I shall not interfere with it.
Sentence was not manifestly excessive as the goods were not recovered.
Appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
November 19, 1987
PORTER
JUDGE