Nassoro s/o Mohamedi v. R., Crim. App. 745-D-67, 8/11/67, Georges C. J.

Nassoro s/o Mohamedi v. R., Crim. App. 745-D-67, 8/11/67, Georges C. J.

Accused were convicted of burglary and stealing upon evidence that four days after the offence was committed a Kitenge shirt was found in the possession of one accused and a coat, pair of trousers and other articles were found in the possession of the other accused. These articles were identified in the charge only as “different clothes.”

            Held: (1) In such cases as this the charge should itemize in some detail the property alleged to have been stolen, particularly where the accused raise the defence that it is their own property. (2) The proper procedure for identification of property in court is that the claimant should describe the item before it is shown to him, so that it can be clear to the court when the item is eventually tendered whether or not he was able to identify it. Convictions set aside.