R. v. Simon Daudi & Yusufu Ramadhani – Crim. Rev. 2-D-72; 14/1/72; Biron J.
The accuseds were convicted of housebreaking and stealing and committed to Malindi Approved School for three years. The proceedings were forwarded to the High Court for examination before the order was carried into effect. The High Court found (a) that the accuseds, both juveniles, had not been medically examined as to their ages, nor a finding made thereon as required by the Children and Young Persons Ordinance s. 16, (b) before committing them to the Approved School the magistrate had not enquired from the Manager whether there were vacancies at the School as required by s.24 of the Ordinance and (c) the order for a fixed period was irregular. The proceedings were accordingly returned to the district court with directions.
Held: (1) “The medical reports … disclose that one of the accused is aged about 12 years whilst the other is aged about 14 years. According to the Probation Officer’s report the two juveniles got into trouble on account of lack of proper parental control........ Although it would appear from the report that the accused would benefit from probation, in view of the long lapse of time and the fact that they would appear to have been in custody, although on remand, for nearly a year, I am very far from persuaded that the justice of the case requires any punishment to be meted out, or even any supervisory order to be made, at this so belated stage.” The order committing the accused to the Approved School was set aside and an absolute discharge substituted.
0 Comments
PLACE YOUR COMMENT HERE
WARNING: DO NOT USE ABUSIVE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.
THE COMMENTS OF OUR READERS IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY.