[2020] KEHC 3600 (KLR)
The court found that the trial magistrate's judgment contained a clear error: despite finding the evidence insufficient to convict, the magistrate erroneously entered a conviction under section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The absence of a sentence further indicated that an acquittal was intended. Exercising...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 3600 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Fredrick Mutuku
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 539 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Revision
- Outcome
- Accused acquitted; conviction substituted with acquittal under section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Judges
- CJ Kendagor
- Legal Topics
- Criminal Revision, Error on Face of Record, Acquittal Vs Conviction
- 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
Republic
Applicant
Fredrick Mutuku
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Revision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial magistrate erred by convicting the accused despite finding the evidence insufficient for conviction.
- 2 Whether the judgment should be revised to reflect an acquittal instead of a conviction under section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial magistrate's judgment contained a clear error: despite finding the evidence insufficient to convict, the magistrate erroneously entered a conviction under section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The absence of a sentence further indicated that an acquittal was intended. Exercising its revisionary jurisdiction under sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the High Court substituted the word 'convicted' with 'acquitted' in the judgment, thereby acquitting the accused of all charges.
Court Disposition
Accused acquitted; conviction substituted with acquittal under section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Orders
- The word 'convicted' in the judgment is substituted with 'acquitted' under section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The accused stands acquitted of all charges.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
HIGH COURT CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO. 539 OF 2020
LESIIT, J
REPUBLIC.................................................. PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
FREDRICK MUTUKU.......................................ACCUSED
(Being Revision of the Order in Judgment of Hon. Lilian Arika (SPM) in
Milimani Chief Magistrate’s Criminal Case No. 1587 of 2017 dated 26th September, 2019)
RULING ON REVISION
1. The Learned Trial Magistrate in this case Hon. Lilian Arika, has made a formal request for review of finding made in this case as contained in her Judgment read in open court on 26th September, 2019.
2. I have perused the judgment of the Hon. Magistrate and I have found that the analysis and evaluation of the evidence led to a finding under the conclusion part of the judgment thus:
“D. CONCLUSION
It is unfortunate that despite the huge loss to the complainant, the evidence on record failed to meet the standard set. It would be unsafe to convict on the same, for the reasons given. The upshot of the foregoing is that the accused person is convicted under section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
On the issue of the exhibits 9a, 9b and 9c being one hundred and twenty padlocks, the same were on 11th June, 2019 released back to the investigating officer. If no appeal is preferred within 14 days, the same to be released for use by the complainant.
HON. ARIKA
SPM
26/9/2019”
3. It is clear from the above excerpt that there is an error on the face of the record. The learned trial Magistrate concluded that it was unsafe to convict on the evidence on record but went ahead to enter a conviction under section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code. At the close of the judgment no sentence was passed, another indication that the Learned Trial Magistrate meant to acquit and not convict the accused person.
4. In exercise of the powers of revision under section 362 and section 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, I correct the error on the face of the record by substituting the word ‘convicted’ in the said judgment with the word ‘acquitted’ under section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
5. In the result, the accused person stands acquitted of the charges he faced in that case.
DATED IN NAIROBI THIS 1ST JULY, 2020.
LESIIT, J.
JUDGE