Rajabu s/o Mahanza v. R., Crim. App. 830-D-67, 22/11/67, Duff J.

Rajabu s/o Mahanza v. R., Crim. App. 830-D-67, 22/11/67, Duff J.

Accused were convicted of arson. There was evidence that they had verbally made indecent advances towards complainant. This was corroborated by a neighbour of complainant. Complainant said that when she refused them, accused threatened to burn her house down. The neighbour did not hear this alleged threat. Three nights later, complainant’s house was set on fire. At that time complainant alleged that she now at a distance of 40 paces two people running way; whom she identified by their figures and clothes as the two accused.

            Held: While a fact may generally be proved by the testimony of  a single witness, this does not lessen the need for testing with the greatest care the evidence of such a witness respecting identification, especially when it is known that the conditions under which the identification took place were far from ideal. In such circumstances other evidence, direct or circumstantial, pointing to guilt is required. [Citing Abdallh s/o Wendo v. R., 20 E.A.C.A. 166] Conviction quashed.