[2004] KEHC 2583 (KLR)
The court found that there was no evidence to show that the appellant knew the goods were stolen or that he did anything with them. The goods were brought to the house by the co-accused, who admitted to the theft, and there was no evidence that the appellant kept, retained, or had knowledge of the stolen goods. As...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KEHC 2583 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Thomas Bakari; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 375 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence set aside; appellant to be released unless otherwise lawfully held
- Legal Topics
- House Breaking, Handling Stolen Property, Burden of Proof, Knowledge of Stolen Goods
- 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
Thomas Bakari
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant had knowledge that the goods found in his residence were stolen.
- 2 Whether the evidence on record was sufficient to sustain a conviction for handling stolen property.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was no evidence to show that the appellant knew the goods were stolen or that he did anything with them. The goods were brought to the house by the co-accused, who admitted to the theft, and there was no evidence that the appellant kept, retained, or had knowledge of the stolen goods. As such, the conviction was not supported by the evidence on record, and the appellant was wrongly convicted.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence set aside; appellant to be released unless otherwise lawfully held
Orders
- The conviction is quashed.
- The sentence is set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
6 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 375 OF 2002 (From Original Conviction and Sentence in Criminal Case No. 41 of 2002 of the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Mombasa A.W. Ngugi RM) THOMAS BAKARI ……………………………………. APPELLANT Versus REPUBLIC ……………………………………………… RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T The Appellant was with another charged with the offence of house breaking and stealing contrary to Sections 304(1) and 279(b) of the Penal Code. The Appellant was also charged with the alternative charge of handling stolen property contrary to section 322(2) of the Penal Code. After trial the appellant was convicted of the alternative charge and sentenced to 31/2 years imprisonment. He has appealed against both the conviction and sentence.
At the hearing of the Appeal Mr. Monda, learned State Counsel, conceded the appeal on the ground that there was no evidence on record to prove that the Appellant knew the goods were stolen.I have perused the record and I agree with Mr. Monda that there was no evidence against the Appellant. Appellant used to stay with Accused one in lower court.Accused one who admitted having stolen the goods took the goods to the house where appellant was staying. There was no evidence that Appellant did anything with those goods. There was also no evidence that Appellant knew the goods were stolen or he kept or retained them. The goods were kept in the house by Accused 1 in the lower court.
For these reasons I find that the Appellant was wrongly convicted. I therefore quash the conviction and set aside the sentence. Appellant is to be set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
DATED this 20th day of March 2004.
D.K. Maraga Ag. JUDGE