Nangela v. R. Crim. App. 233-M-71; 14/1/72; El-Kindy, J.

 

Nangela v. R. Crim. App. 233-M-71; 14/1/72; El-Kindy, J.

The applicant applied for a certificate to be issued in terms of Rule 49A (1) of the East African Court of Appeal Rules, 1954 which provides that a superior court could issue a certificate upon being satisfied that the intended appeal raises questions of law proper for the determination by the court of Appeal and that the intending appellant be certified a pauper. The applicant contended that the prosecution evidence should not have been accepted and secondly that he was no longer capable of meeting the costs of the appeal since he had exhausted his savings.

            Held: (1) “In his affidavit, the applicant continued to maintain that the trial court and therefore the appellate court erred in accepting the evidence of the bursar as she was not a person to believe. And in his petition of appeal, he explained why she ought not to have been believed. As I see it, the issue was one of credibility and having looked at the evidence, I cannot say that any legal issue arises out of it. It was a question of whether the trial court would accept the evidence of the bursar or not, and this is a mere question of fact. The trial court was satisfied, after considering the various aspects of the case, that she was a reliable witness and the appellate court saw no reason to differ within this finding of fact. In the result, I find that the first requirement of rule 49A was not satisfied. I am prepared, and I in fact accept, that the applicant is no longer capable of meeting the costs of appeal as he has exhausted his savings, but this by itself is not adequate reason for certifying that he should be granted leave to appeal to the court of Appeal as a pauper.” (2) Application dismissed.