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

kehc-2009-00492

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAKURU Criminal Application 262, 263, 264, 267 & 272 of 2006 SIMON NGUGI NJOROGE…………...…….1ST APPELLANT SAMUEL MATHERI JOSEPHINE.…..……2ND APPELLANT PETER MUTURI NJOROGE……………….3RD APPELLANT JOHN NDUNGU MATHENGE…………......4TH APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………….........…..RESPONDENT (From original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No.912 of 2005 of the Chief Magistrate’s court at Nakuru – M. W. ONDITI, SRM) JUDGMENT OF THE COURT SIMON NGUGI NJOROGE, SAMUEL MATHERI NJOROGE, PETER MUTURI NJOROGE and JOHN NDUNGU MATHENGE, the appellants in these appeals were upon trial on a charge of robbery with violence contrary to Section 296(2) and assault causing actual bodily harm contrary to Section 251 of the Penal Code convicted on both counts and sentenced to death on the first count and three years imprisonment on the second count. The trial magistrate ordered “Both sentences to run consecutively”. They have appealed against both those convictions and sentences. The two star witnesses, PW1 and PW2, both confessed that they had not seen any of the appellants prior to the robbery. They claimed to have recognized them at the time of robbery but they did not give any

page 1 of 2

description of any of the appellants to the police or say what made them recognize the appellants. The police never held an identification parade and only showed the appellants to the witnesses at the police station and in court the two witnesses purported to identify the appellants. That is dock identification which is no identification at all. We therefore agree with both the state and accused’s counsel that the trial court’s finding that the two witnesses recognized the appellants was a grave misdirection. There was absolutely no evidence to support the conviction of the appellants on either of the two charges. Consequently we quash the convictions of the appellants and set aside the sentences against them. The appellant shall be set free forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. DATED and delivered this 19th day of November, 2009. D. K. MARAGA JUDGE. M. G. MUGO JUDGE.

page 2 of 2

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.