Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Daniel Ngenga Nganga v Republic

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI APPELLATE SIDE HIGH COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 30 OF 1999 (From Original Conviction(s) and sentence(s) Criminal case No. 1450 of 1998 of the SNR. Principal Magistrate’s Court at Kibera) DANIEL NGENGA NGANGA………………………………APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………………………………..RESPONDENT JUDGMENT The appellant was convicted of two offences. The first was un natural offence c/s 162(a) of the Penal Code and the second was being in possession of Public stores c/s 324(2) of the Penal Code. On conviction the appellant was jailed for 3 years in count one and 12 months in respect of count two. Sentences were ordered to run concurrently. He appealed against both the conviction and sentence. Pw1 gave grafic events of what transpired between him and the appellant. He was accosted by the appellant, who was armed with a knife, and his trousers forced down. Pw1 did not shy away in describing what followed. He knew the appellant before, as a neighbour, and informed his mother of the encounter on the same day. Dr. Kamau who subsequently examined Pw1 confirmed the injuries sustained by him. In his defence the appellant avoided any mention of the offence he was charged with. In respect of count two, the appellant was found with a Kenya Army badge in his pocket. He gave no explanation for that possession. Section 324(2) of the Penal Code is clear. He had no defence to that offence. In my judgment conviction was safe, the sentences were lenient. I see no merit in the appeal. Accordingly this appeal is dismissed. Order accordingly. Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 22nd day of November, 2001 MBOGHOLI MSAGHA JUDGE

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.