Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Juma bin Kombo Mnyamwezi v. R., Crim. App. 144-Z-65, 4/1/66, ------- Ag. C. J.



Juma bin Kombo Mnyamwezi v. R., Crim. App. 144-Z-65, 4/1/66, ------- Ag. C. J.

The accused answered charges of breaking into a building to steal a hand cart by saying that the complainant’s child had lent him the cart. He had made this claim “from the beginning.” The accused did not call the child to confirm this, but the complainant admitted that the accused had borrowed the cart several times in the past.

Held: Although the accused might better have called the child as a witness, the burden is till on the prosecution to prove the charge. It has accordingly been held that “where an accused person has, before trial, given a reasonably probable explanation to account for his possession of stolen property, this explanation should be investigated and not rejected at the trial unless the prosecution can prove that it was untrue.” Conviction quashed.

Post a Comment

0 Comments