R v Ndembele and Others (Criminal Review Case 226 of 1940) [1940] ZMHCNR 10 (31 December 1940)
The accused should have been tried separately because their offences were not connected, but no order is made as no injustice occurred.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1940] ZMHCNR 10
- Parties
- Prosecutor: R. (Regina); Accused: Ndembele and Others
- Court
- High Court of Northern Rhodesia
- Jurisdiction
- Zambia
- Case Number
- Criminal Review Case 226 of 1940
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Review / Judgment
- Outcome
- No order made
- Legal Topics
- Joinder of Accused, Similar Offences, Trial Procedure
- 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
R. (Regina)
Prosecutor
Ndembele and Others
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether accused persons charged with similar but unconnected offences should be jointly indicted
Ratio Decidendi
The accused should have been tried separately because their offences were not connected, but no order is made as no injustice occurred.
Court Disposition
No order made
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
100 Vol, II] R. v. NDEMBELE AND OTHERS. Crim inal R eview Case N o. 226 of 1940. Joinder o f accused— similar offences. In this case seven persons were indicted for wearing clothing in im itation o f District Messengers’ uniforms. The seven accused should have been indicted separately because the offence o f any one o f the accused was in no way concerned with the offence committed by any o f the other accused although each accused committed an offence under the same section. See also B. v. Supuni 4 N . R . L. R . 249. Law, C . J.: Though each accused has com m itted an offence under section 8 (1) Cap. 43, no one accused appears to have been concerned with the actual offence committed by any o f the other accused. In other words A is in no way concerned with B ’s offence though both offences fall under the same section. Strictly speaking, the accused should have been tried separately, but as no injustice was suffered b y any o f the accused it is not proposed to make any order in the case.