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

High Court 7020 of 2018

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU CRA 24 OF 2018 ALOISE KAREITHI THIAENE................................................APPLICANT VS REPUBLIC ............................................................................RESPONDENT JUDGMENT The appellant Aloise Kareithi Thiaene appealed against the conviction and sentence in Tigania SRM CR.C.No. 118 of 2018 on the grounds set out in the petition of appeal and sought that conviction and sentence be set aside and he be released and se at liberty. On casual perusal of the proceedings in the lower court exhibit that the language of court was not indicated when charge was read to the appellant. It is not indicated which language accused understood. It is not shown whether appellant responded when charge was read to him before the facts were read by the prosecutor. It is not shown whether appellant was present in court. The handwritten proceedings are not consistent with the typed and certified proceedings which show facts were read whereas the handwritten proceedings don’t indicate facts were read. It is signed that recoveries are before court but no particulars and quantities. It is also not shown how the alleged recoveries were disposed off and/or stored. I do find the plea was not unequivocal and therefore allow the appeal. The conviction is quashed and sentence set aside. Appellant is set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. HON. A.ONG’INJO JUDGE JUDGEMENT SIGNED, DELIVERED AND DATED THIS 8TH DAY OF MAY 2018. In the Presence of: Applicant:- N/A Respondent:-N/A Order Notice of Judgment to be given to state and to Officer in Charge GK prison holding appellant. HON. A. ONG’INJO 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.