Esheria Kenya Case Law
Sign in
Kenya Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Kenya Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
1 court collection
Last checked

Search and filter Kenya case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Kenya decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal Law [2024] KEHC 9361 (KLR)

Oyier v Republic

Oyier v Republic [2024] KEHC 9361 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Appeal E161 of 2021
Judge
LN Mutende

The High Court found that the prosecution failed to prove the main charges of burglary, stealing, and office breaking beyond reasonable doubt, as there was no direct evidence placing the appellant at the crime scenes. However, the evidence established that the appellant was found in possession of recently stolen property belonging to the complainants, and he failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for such possession. The doctrine of recent possession applied, shifting the evidential burden to the appellant, which he did not discharge. The conviction on the alternative counts of handling…

Source excerpt

  • Handling Stolen Property
  • Burglary
  • Office Breaking
  • Recent Possession Doctrine
  • Sentencing
  • Forfeiture Of Property
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2021] KEHC 5123 (KLR)

Harun Mohamed Sugow v Republic

Harun Mohamed Sugow v Republic [2021] KEHC 5123 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Appeal 34 of 2019
Judge
A Ali-Aroni

The High Court partly allowed a criminal appeal, upheld the conviction for office breaking and stealing, quashed the handling count, and reduced sentence for time spent in custody.

  • Office Breaking
  • Handling Stolen Property
  • Sentencing Principles
  • Double Jeopardy
  • Office-breaking
  • Stealing
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2019] KEHC 3701 (KLR)

Morgan Nauna v Republic

Morgan Nauna v Republic [2019] KEHC 3701 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Appeal 139 of 2017
Judges
AT Sitati, DN Musyoka

The court found that although there was no direct evidence linking the appellant to the break-in, the circumstantial evidence was cogent and compelling. The appellant was found in possession of stolen items shortly after the theft, failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for their possession, and was implicated by the sequence of events leading to his arrest. The trial court's evaluation of the evidence and the appellant's defence was proper, and the conviction was safe. The sentence imposed was lawful. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed in its entirety.

Source excerpt

  • Office Breaking
  • Handling Stolen Property
  • Burden Of Proof
  • Evaluation Of Evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2017] KEHC 1311 (KLR)

Ruben Wambua Peter & Stephen Muoki Peter v Republic

Ruben Wambua Peter & Stephen Muoki Peter v Republic [2017] KEHC 1311 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Appeal 17 of 2017
Judge
CM Kariuki

The High Court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction for robbery with violence and related offences was unsafe because the key exhibits (allegedly stolen books) were not formally produced in evidence, contrary to established evidentiary requirements. The evidence regarding recovery of stolen property was contradictory and did not meet the threshold for the doctrine of recent possession. Furthermore, the trial court failed to properly consider the appellants' defences of alibi, which were corroborated and not shaken by the prosecution. The…

Source excerpt

  • Robbery With Violence
  • Office Breaking
  • Handling Stolen Goods
  • Doctrine Of Recent Possession
  • Alibi Defence
  • Evidentiary Procedure
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2016] KEHC 7923 (KLR)

Ibrahim Makokha Wandera v Republic

Ibrahim Makokha Wandera v Republic [2016] KEHC 7923 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Appeal 228 of 2011
Judge
LK Kimaru

The court found that the appellant, employed as a security guard at the premises, was not under duress but actively aided the robbers by allowing them access, providing intelligence, and obstructing efforts to seek help. The direct and corroborated evidence of PW1 and PW3 established that the appellant was an accomplice, not a victim. His subsequent escape with the robbers and possession of stolen items invoked the doctrine of recent possession, further implicating him. The appellant's defence was discredited as a fabrication to disguise his role. The prosecution proved the charge of robbery…

Source excerpt

  • Robbery With Violence
  • Office Breaking
  • Handling Stolen Property
  • Standard Of Proof
  • Accomplice Liability
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2014] KEHC 6038 (KLR)

Eutycus Kangiremon Lokito v Republic

Eutycus Kangiremon Lokito v Republic [2014] KEHC 6038 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Appeal 124 of 2012

High Court dismissed a criminal appeal, upholding conviction for office breaking and committing a felony based on recent possession of stolen property and an unsatisfactory explanation.

  • Office Breaking
  • Theft
  • Recent Possession Doctrine
  • Circumstantial Evidence
  • Recent-possession-doctrine
  • Circumstantial-evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2014] KEHC 5137 (KLR)

Stephen Kamau Mutambuki v Republic

Stephen Kamau Mutambuki v Republic [2014] KEHC 5137 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Appeal 65 of 2013
Judge
J Ngaah

The court found that the prosecution evidence was riddled with material inconsistencies and contradictions, particularly regarding the date and circumstances of the alleged offence, the recovery and production of exhibits, and the identification of the appellant. The identification was based solely on a single witness under unfavourable conditions, without an identification parade or corroborative evidence, rendering it unreliable. The trial court further erred by sentencing the appellant on both the main and alternative counts despite convicting him only on the main count, contrary to sectio…

Source excerpt

  • Office Breaking
  • Identification Evidence
  • Handling Stolen Goods
  • Sentencing Errors
  • Appeals Process
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2013] KEHC 1443 (KLR)

Peter Ole Sikoki v Republic

Peter Ole Sikoki v Republic [2013] KEHC 1443 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Appeal 53 of 2012
Judge
GO Shikwe

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal after finding no evidence linking the appellant to office breaking and stealing. The conviction was quashed and sentence set aside.

  • Office Breaking
  • Stealing
  • Evidence Evaluation
  • Criminal Liability
  • Criminal-law
  • Evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2013] KEHC 1325 (KLR)

Dan Karang Chelule v Republic

Dan Karang Chelule v Republic [2013] KEHC 1325 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Revision 176 of 2013
Judge
B Ongaya

The High Court revised a nine-month prison sentence for office breaking and committing a felony, substituting it with three months’ community service.

  • Revision Of Sentence
  • Community Service Orders
  • Office Breaking
  • Sentencing Guidelines
  • Criminal-revision
  • Community-service-orders
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2012] KEHC 5427 (KLR)

JOHN KIOKO MWAU v REPUBLIC

JOHN KIOKO MWAU v REPUBLIC [2012] KEHC 5427 (KLR)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Appeal 32 of 2010

The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal and upheld a 5-year sentence for office breaking and theft, relying on circumstantial evidence and recent possession.

  • Office Breaking
  • Theft
  • Circumstantial Evidence
  • Recent Possession
  • Identification Evidence
  • Criminal-law
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Kenya decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.