[2004] KEHC 761 (KLR)
The trial was a nullity because part of the prosecution was conducted by a police corporal who was not authorised under Section 85(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. As a result, there was no valid trial capable of sustaining a conviction or sentence. The appellate court, acting on its own motion, quashed the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KEHC 761 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Peter Munyasia Mulele; Appellant: Jackson Nalianya Simiyu; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 65 & 66 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / First Appellate Court Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence set aside; no retrial ordered
- Legal Topics
- Unlawful Assault, Actual Bodily Harm, Trial Irregularity, Unauthorised Prosecution
- 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
Peter Munyasia Mulele
Appellant
Jackson Nalianya Simiyu
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / First Appellate Court Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution was conducted by a legally authorised person under Section 85(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the trial was valid and competent to sustain a conviction and sentence.
- 3 Whether a retrial should be ordered after quashing the conviction.
Ratio Decidendi
The trial was a nullity because part of the prosecution was conducted by a police corporal who was not authorised under Section 85(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. As a result, there was no valid trial capable of sustaining a conviction or sentence. The appellate court, acting on its own motion, quashed the conviction and set aside the sentence. Given that the offence occurred nearly five years prior, it would be unfair and unjust to order a retrial. Any fines paid by the appellants are to be refunded forthwith.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence set aside; no retrial ordered
Orders
- The appeal is allowed.
- The conviction is quashed and sentence set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
6 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUNGOMA CR. APPEAL NO. 65 & 66 OF 2001PETER MUNYASIA MULELE …………. APPELLANTS JACKSON NALIANYA SIMIYU VS REPUBLIC ………………. RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T On the 15th day of June 2001 the learned Senior Resident Magistrate M/S L.N. Mutende convicted the appellants for the offence of assault causing actual bodily harm contrary to Section 251 of the Penal Code. It was stated that on the 3rd day of December 2000 at Bisunu village, Misikhu location in Bungoma District within the Western Province jointly and unlawfully assaulted Centrine Wafula thereby occasioning her actual bodily harm. The learned magistrate sentenced each appellant to a fine of Khs.10,000 and in defeault to serve 1 year in prison.
In this appeal I have noted from the proceedings that the prosecution was partly conducted by a police corporal who is not authorised under Section 85 (2) of the criminal procedure code to do so. Consequently there was no valid trial which could sustain a conviction nor a sentence. This point was not argued by the parties but I am enjoined to ascertain whether there was a competent trial before the trial court by virtue of the fact that I am sitting as a first appellate court in this appeal.
In the end the appeal is allowed. The conviction is quashed and sentence set aside. The offence was committed on 3. 12. 2000 nearly five years ago. It will be unfair and unjust to order for a re-trial. Any fines therefore that may have been paid should be refunded forthwith.
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 30th DAY OF July 2004
J.K. SERGON JUDGE