Frank Kachile v. R., E.A.C.A. Crim. App. 97-DSM-72, 24/10/72.

Frank Kachile v. R., E.A.C.A. Crim. App. 97-DSM-72, 24/10/72.

Held:   (1) Leave of the court is always required for the recall of a witness.

(2) The court may, in special circumstances allow the recall of a prosecution witness even after the close of the prosecution case, likewise with defence witnesses.

SPRY, AG. P. – [The court dismissed the appeal from convictions on two counts of theft by public servant, reducing them, however, to counts of theft c/s 265, Penal Code. in the course of its judgment, the court made the

Following remarks on an opinion expressed by the judge in the High Court]. The learned judge expressed the opinion that, until the prosecution has closed its case, it is entitled, as of right, to recall a witness on a point which the prosecution considers material to its case. With respect, we do not agree. We think that the leave of the court must always be obtained for the recall of a witness, and this is a judicial discretion, although it will normally be allowed up to the time when the prosecution (or the defence) closes its case and may, in special circumstances, be allowed even after that to meet questions that could not reasonably have been anticipated.