Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

John Wayaga Nyamahende v. R. Crim. App. 550-M-68, 16/9/68, Mustafa J.



John Wayaga Nyamahende v. R. Crim. App. 550-M-68, 16/9/68, Mustafa J.

Appellant, who was a conductor of a bus, was convicted on his own pleas of guilty of failing to comply with conditions attached to a road service licence. It was alleged that appellant failed to comply with the conditions of the time-table by arriving late and having left late contrary to sections 23(3) and 26(1) of the Traffic Ordinance Cap. 373 of the Laws. It was not established that appellant was the holder of the licence or the owner of the bus.

            Held; Appellant was the wrong person charged since Section 26(1) of Cap. 373 only applies to the holder of licence and it was not proved that he was the holder of the licence. Appeal allowed. The Court approved the obiter in Hamed Abdallah v. Republic [1964] E.A. 270 at page 272 to the effect that only a licence holder can be charged under section 26(1) of Cap. 373 and not a driver nor a conductor of a vehicle though he may be responsible for the offence committed. 

Post a Comment

0 Comments