Ad Code

Recent Posts


Lawrence Kaguruku Mutungi v. R., Crim. App. 401-M—67, 14/8/67, Mustafa, J.

Lawrence Kaguruku Mutungi v. R., Crim. App. 401-M—67, 14/8/67, Mustafa, J.

Appellant and a co-accused were charged with theft. The  co-accused was acquitted, but appellant was convicted on the bases of the co-accused ‘s testimony against him. The High Court found that the co-accused was “without doubt an accomplice” of appellant.

            Held: (1) A conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of a co-accused who is an accomplice. Such evidence requires corroboration. (2) The fact that appellant seemed an untruthful person in the witness box could not serve as such corroboration. Conviction quashed.


Post a Comment