Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

R. v. Oswald Bruno Kanga Crim. App. 844-M-69; 13/2/70; Kimicha J.



R. v. Oswald Bruno Kanga Crim. App. 844-M-69; 13/2/70; Kimicha J.

the accused who was a senior police officer was convicted on two counts: (1) Unlawful possession of government trophy c/ss 49 and 53 of Fauna Conservation Ordinance, Cap. 302; (2) hunting game animals without licence c/ss 12 and 53 of Fauna Conservation Ordinance, Cap. 302. He was sentenced to a fine of Shs. 500/- with 6 months imprisonment in default on the first count, and to a fine of Shs. 1000/- with 6 months imprisonment in default on the second count. The State has now appealed against the inadequacy of the sentenced on the grounds that the magistrate should have taken into account the accused’s senior and responsible position and the gravity and popularity of the offence.

            Held: “I do agree with the State that the accused held a very responsible post and that his offence was grave and prevalent. But it appears from the record that the trial magistrate took these facts into consideration when passing sentence …. Also the accused said in mitigation that he had on the date of his conviction been interdicted for 4 months. In cash terms this means that the offence had on the day of his conviction cost him about Shs. 2,400/- And he completely lost his job and all accrued privileges on his conviction. The sentence appears to be inadequate if considered separately from the material and social losses that the accused

suffered on his conviction. But I am of the opinion that if these other losses are taken into consideration his sentence would appear to be adequate. He is now in financial ruin with no prospects of being re-employed by the Government and parastatal organisation. He has lost all his pension privileges and he has the life long stigma of being a convict of a serious offence. I am of the opinion that the accused has been punished enough for his offence. For the above reasons the appeal by the State is dismissed and the sentence imposed by the lower court is to stand.”

Post a Comment

0 Comments