R v Pakhalekhale (Confirmation Case 812 of 1996) [1997] MWHC 6 (15 March 1997)
The defendant's conduct occurred during the day, so the charge of burglary was inappropriate and must be altered to housebreaking.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1997] MWHC 6
- Parties
- Prosecution: The Republic; Defendant: Afiki Phakhalekhale
- Court
- High Court of Malawi
- Jurisdiction
- Malawi
- Case Number
- Confirmation Case 812 of 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Confirmation
- Outcome
- The burglary count is altered to housebreaking; sentences confirmed.
- Legal Topics
- Burglary, Housebreaking, Offence Regularisation
- 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
The Republic
Prosecution
Afiki Phakhalekhale
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Confirmation
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conduct constituted burglary or housebreaking under the law
Ratio Decidendi
The defendant's conduct occurred during the day, so the charge of burglary was inappropriate and must be altered to housebreaking.
Court Disposition
The burglary count is altered to housebreaking; sentences confirmed.
Orders
- The count is altered to housebreaking.
- Sentences imposed are confirmed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAWI PRINCIPAL REGISTRY CONFIRMATION CASE NO. 812 OF 1996 THE REPUBLIC VERSUS AFIKI PAKHALEKHALE From the Principal Resident Magistrate’s Court at Balaka Criminal Case No. 60 of 1996 CORAM: MWAUNGULU, J Manyungwa, State Advocate, for The State Accused, present and unrepresented Chilunga, Official Interpreter Mangisoni, Recording Officer Mwaungulu, J ORDER The case was set down to regularise the offence for which the defendant was charged and ultimately convicted for. The defendant, Afiki Phakhalekhale, was charged on two counts, one burglary and the other of theft. The latter does not concern us. He was sentenced to three years and one and half years respectively on the two counts. The sentence imposed does not concern us. It is confirmed. It is the burglary count which caught the attention of the judge. The defendant broke and entered the complainant’s house at 3.00 o’clock p.m. It was during the day. Burglary is, according to our law, a nocturnal activity. The offence must be committed in the night. Housebreaking covers the same conduct during the day. Housebreaking is a diurnal activity. The count is, therefore, altered to housebreaking. Made in open Court this 16th day of March 1997 at Blantyre. D. F. Mwaungulu JUDGE