[1947] EACA 21
The Court held that the proceedings before the Supreme Court were revision proceedings, and section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code unambiguously excludes the right of appeal from such proceedings. The legislative intent is clear: only matters other than revision proceedings may be appealed to the Court of Appeal...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1947] EACA 21
- Parties
- Appellant: Rex; Respondent: Njeroge s/o Muroba
- Court
- East African Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal No. 257 of 1946
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Revision
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- Graham Paul CJ, Horne J, Sheridan CJ
- Legal Topics
- Criminal Revision, Appeal Rights, Jurisdiction of Appellate Court
- 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
Rex
Appellant
Njeroge s/o Muroba
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Revision
Legal Issues
- 1 Does an appeal lie to the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa from a decision of the Supreme Court made in revision proceedings under the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that the proceedings before the Supreme Court were revision proceedings, and section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code unambiguously excludes the right of appeal from such proceedings. The legislative intent is clear: only matters other than revision proceedings may be appealed to the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa, and the present case falls squarely within the excluded category. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- No appeal lies from proceedings by way of revision; appeal dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
### COURT OF APPEAL FOR EASTERN AFRICA
# Before SIR JOSEPH SHERIDAN, C. J. (Kenya), SIR G. GRAHAM PAUL, C. J. (Tanganvika) and HORNE, J. (Kenya)
## REX, Appellant
### $\mathbf{1}$
# NJEROGE s/o MUROBA, Respondent Criminal Appeal No. 257 of 1946
### (Appeal from decision of H. M. High Court of Kenva)
Criminal Procedure—Order in Revision—Appeal—Section 360 Criminal Procedure Code. Kenva.
The accused was tried and convicted of a criminal offerice in a subordinate court and sentenced to a sentence of imprisonment requiring confirmation by the Supreme Court. In the exercise of its powers of revision the Supreme Court set aside the conviction and sentence.
The Crown appealed.
*Held* $(11-2-47)$ .—That no appeal lies from proceedings by way of revision.
Appeal dismissed.
Phillips, Crown Counsel (Kenya) (Lowe with him), for the Crown.
### Dar for the respondent.
JUDGMENT (delivered by SIR JOSEPH SHERIDAN, C. J.).—The point which this Court has to decide is a perfectly simple one and in our opinion only one answer is possible to the question "Does an appeal lie to this Court from the decision" of the Supreme Court in the case in question?". The proceedings in which the<br>Supreme Court gave the decision now appealed from were unquestionably proceedings by way of revision and the Legislature in its wisdom has enacted that there shall be no appeal to the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa by any party to such proceedings. The words of the section are quite free from any ambiguity The section, in so far as it is material, is as follows: $-$ .
"360. Any party to proceedings under this Part, other than proceedings by way of revision under sections 361 to 366, may appeal to the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa on a matter of law (not including severity of sentence) but not on a matter of fact."
$\mathcal{L} = \mathcal{L}^{\mathcal{M}}$
The appeal is dismissed on the ground that no appeal lies.