|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2025 |
|
|
Whether the prosecution proved aggravated defilement of a three‑year‑old beyond reasonable doubt and imposed an appropriate custodial sentence.
* Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – Elements: victim under 14, sexual act (penetration), accused’s participation – burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt. * Evidence – Medical evidence of vaginal tear and stitching corroborating sexual penetration; contemporaneous statements by child admissible as res gestae. * Evidence – Alibi and alternative explanations (fall from bicycle; accused’s chest injury) evaluated and rejected where inconsistent or uncorroborated. * Sentencing – Application of Sentencing Guidelines and precedents; aggravating factors (very young victim, familial relationship, severe injury) justify substantial custodial sentence; deduction for remand time.
|
30 October 2025 |
|
Penetration and non-consent proved, but identity of the assailant not established; accused acquitted.
* Criminal law – Rape – Ingredients: unlawful sexual intercourse, lack of consent, participation of accused; medical corroboration of penetration.
* Evidence – Identification – visual impairment and identification by matchlight; reliability and criminal standard of proof.
* Procedure – Investigative duty: police obligation to test/destroy alibi; effect of absent police testimony on prosecution case.
* Verdict – Where identity is not proved beyond reasonable doubt, accused must be acquitted despite proof of intercourse and non-consent.
|
29 October 2025 |
|
Intercourse and non‑consent proven, but unreliable identification and unrefuted alibi led to acquittal of the accused.
Criminal law – Rape – Elements: unlawful intercourse, lack of consent, accused’s participation – Identification evidence – visual impairment and limited lighting (matchbox) – medical corroboration of intercourse – alibi not disproved – failure to call police witnesses – acquittal.
|
29 October 2025 |
|
Insufficient proof of malice aforethought: murder acquittal but conviction for manslaughter and custodial sentence with remand credit.
* Criminal law – homicide – elements of murder: death, unlawful act, malice aforethought, causation. * Evidence – post‑mortem corroboration of assault and cause of death. * Mens rea – malice aforethought not inferred from non‑lethal force (fists/feet) against an elderly victim. * Defence – intoxication raised but not proved to negate intent. * Sentence – manslaughter; remand credit applied.
|
29 October 2025 |
|
Prosecution proved unlawful fatal assault but not intent to kill; accused acquitted of murder and convicted of manslaughter, sentenced accordingly.
Criminal law – Homicide – Causation and proof of death – Post-mortem evidence corroborating assault; Malice aforethought – Inference of intent where non-lethal force used – requirement for clear evidence; Intoxication defence – burden and when it negates specific intent; Conviction reduced from murder to manslaughter where intent to kill not proved; Sentencing – remand credit and comparative authorities.
|
29 October 2025 |
|
Single-witness identification and medical corroboration upheld conviction for rape; sentence reduced by remand credit.
* Criminal law – Rape – Ingredients: unlawful sexual intercourse, lack of consent, participation of accused – proof beyond reasonable doubt. * Identification – single identifying witness at night – reliability assessed on proximity, duration, lighting and corroboration. * Assessor’s opinion – trial judge may reject assessor’s dissent if unsupported by evidence. * Sentence – application of sentencing guidelines, mitigation, aggravation and remand credit.
|
29 October 2025 |
|
Plaintiff’s oral evidence and possession proved purchase of one acre despite an untranslated sale document; interest on costs set aside.
Land law – proof of ownership by purchase and possession; pleadings and scheduling conferences – effect of unamended plaint where agreed facts exist; evidence – admissibility of untranslated/unexhibited document; forgery allegation requires proof; locus in quo – requirements and effect of party absence; costs – interest on costs not awarded where unpleaded.
|
22 October 2025 |
|
Oral purchase evidence and long possession established ownership of one acre despite unamended plaint and an untranslated sale document.
Land law – proof of ownership by purchase and possession; pleadings – agreed facts at scheduling conference and failure to amend plaint; admissibility – sale agreement not exhibited or translated; locus in quo – sketch map and attendance list sufficient where no prejudice shown; costs – interest on taxed costs not awarded when unpleaded.
|
22 October 2025 |
|
Whether respondent proved ownership by purchase and possession despite an unexhibited vernacular sale agreement; interest on costs unpleaded.
Land law – ownership by purchase and possession; evidentiary requirements for written sale agreements in vernacular (need for translation and formal exhibition); scheduling conference agreed facts and amendment of pleadings; appellate re-evaluation of oral evidence; locus in quo procedure and record; award of interest on costs must be pleaded.
|
22 October 2025 |
| September 2025 |
|
|
Age and penetration proved; accused acquitted because participation was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – proof of age and sexual act (penetration) – medical evidence admissible and probative; Identification and participation must be proved beyond reasonable doubt – contradictions, lack of scene preservation, child‑witness inconsistencies and mob actions may negate proof of accused’s participation.
|
18 September 2025 |
|
Appellants failed to prove a gift or adverse possession; appeal dismissed and trial judgment upheld.
Land law – gift inter vivos: requirement of donor's intent, delivery and acceptance; customary land transfers. Civil procedure – pleadings: necessity to plead adverse possession; consequences of unpleaded cause of action. Adverse possession – elements: factual possession, continuity for 12 years, animus possidendi, exclusivity and adversity. Evidence – locus in quo: court may view but should not record testimony from non-witnesses; irregular admission may be harmless if not relied upon.
|
15 September 2025 |
| August 2025 |
|
|
A suit was remitted for retrial after the trial court dismissed the main claim but failed to resolve the counter-claim.
Civil procedure – appeal – retrial – failure to determine counter-claim – extraneous orders – setting aside erroneous judgment – necessity of retrial where material errors affect the outcome.
|
20 August 2025 |
| July 2025 |
|
|
|
10 July 2025 |
|
Applicant's delay in appealing due to procedural errors and personal reasons insufficient; extension of time dismissed.
Civil procedure - Extension of time - Grounds for delay in appealing a judgment - Procedural errors in filing an appeal
|
10 July 2025 |