Wanyang’ura s/o Matuja v. R., Crim. App. 760-M-68, 29/10/68, Seaton J.

Wanyang’ura s/o Matuja v. R., Crim. App. 760-M-68, 29/10/68, Seaton J.

Accused was convicted on his own plea of cattle theft, and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment and 24 strokes under the Minimum Sentences Act. The court also made an order for compensation in the following terms: “Two heads of cattle recovered to be returned to the complainant and the accused must compensate the complainant six heads of cattle after release from prison.”

            Held: “It is to be observed that the order for compensation is bad for vagueness. Individual cattle may so vary in size and condition that the value of six head of cattle may be Shs. 600/- or Shs. 1,200/. The object of section 6(1) of the Minimum Sentences Act is to ensure that the convicted person receives no material benefit from his crime. Therefore, the trial court is required to assess the value of the property the convicted person had obtained as a result of the commission of the offence and to order the convict to pay to the owner of the property compensation equal to its value. It follows that the trial court should have assessed the value of the 8 head of cattle stolen.” Order for compensation set aside, and order substituted to pay complainant Shs. 600/-.