|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2008 |
|
|
A late amendment to add lack of consent was permitted and the complainant’s evidence (with lay corroboration) sufficed to convict.
Indictment – material omission of lack of consent in rape charge – amendment under s.50(2) Trial on Indictments Act permissible where no injustice; Sexual offences – complainant’s testimony and lay corroboration can suffice despite weak medical report; Identification – single-witness ID reliable where daylight, familiarity and prolonged observation exist; Corroboration – desirable but not mandatory in sexual offence cases.
|
15 October 2008 |
|
Victim's credible testimony and supporting evidence sufficed to convict accused of rape despite night-time identification.
* Criminal law – Rape: elements – carnal knowledge, lack of consent, perpetrator’s identity. * Identification evidence – night-time identification; caution but reliance permissible where conditions (familiarity, voice recognition, light, duration) favor accuracy. * Corroboration in sexual offences – victim’s testimony may suffice for adults; supporting evidence (witnesses, victim’s distressed condition, accused’s conduct) strengthens case. * Alibi and ulterior motive – rejected where inconsistent with cultural/informal evidence and subsequent conduct of accused.
|
15 October 2008 |
|
Dying declaration and single eyewitness identification, corroborated by medical and circumstantial evidence, supported murder convictions and death sentences.
Criminal law – Murder: proof of death, unlawful causation and malice aforethought; Dying declaration – admissibility and weight when made in extremis; Identification – reliability of single eyewitness and severability of fabricated parts; Common intention – joint liability under s.20 Penal Code; Corroboration – medical and circumstantial evidence supporting dying declaration and identification.
|
15 October 2008 |
|
An uncorroborated dying declaration and circumstantial evidence failed to exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence; accused acquitted.
Criminal law – murder: elements (death, unlawful killing, malice aforethought, participation); dying declaration – weight and need for corroboration; circumstantial evidence – must exclude all reasonable hypotheses of innocence; evidential value of untendered exhibits and lack of forensic/fire-origin expert evidence; conduct after an offence as circumstantial inference.
|
3 October 2008 |
|
Single-witness identification with supporting circumstances sufficed to convict of manslaughter where malice was not proved.
* Criminal law – Homicide – proof of death and unlawful killing – medical and eyewitness evidence.
* Criminal law – Malice aforethought – inference of intent; effect of drunken brawl and poor lighting on inference of intent.
* Evidence – Single-witness identification – need for caution and requirement for supporting evidence.
* Criminal procedure – Conviction of minor cognate offence under section 87 Trial on Indictments Act (manslaughter from murder indictment).
* Sentencing – balancing mitigating factors (first offenders, remand) against gravity of reckless conduct causing death.
|
2 October 2008 |
| September 2008 |
|
|
Child’s unsworn testimony must be corroborated; corroboration and favourable identification supported conviction for defilement.
* Criminal law – Defilement – ingredients: sexual intercourse, age under 18, perpetrator’s identity. * Child witness – unsworn testimony after voire dire requires corroboration as a matter of law. * Identification – need for caution but reliability assessed by familiarity, daylight, proximity and multiple witnesses. * Medical evidence – inflammation and discharge may corroborate intercourse even without hymenal rupture.
|
29 September 2008 |
|
Acquittal where circumstantial evidence failed to exclude reasonable hypothesis of innocence regarding accused's participation in spouse's stabbing.
* Criminal law – Murder: elements — death, unlawfulness, malice aforethought, accused’s participation. * Circumstantial evidence — requirement that inculpatory facts exclude all reasonable hypotheses of innocence. * Malice inferred from use of lethal weapon near vital organ. * Acquittal where circumstantial case insufficient to prove identity beyond reasonable doubt.
|
26 September 2008 |
|
Acquittal where theft and violence proven but identity and use of a deadly weapon were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Aggravated robbery: elements (theft; violence; deadly weapon; participation). Identification evidence – single identifying witness, necessity for reliable, consistent first statements and naming assailants at earliest opportunity. Deadly weapon – requirement of firing or recovery/examination to establish as a gun. Circumstantial evidence – recovery of stolen property insufficient to prove participation by accused. Benefit of reasonable doubt to accused.
|
24 September 2008 |
|
Violence and theft proved but no functioning gun established; convicted of simple robbery and sentenced to eight years.
Criminal law — Robbery vs aggravated robbery — Elements required for aggravated robbery (theft, violence, use or threat of deadly weapon, participation) — Identification evidence — favourable conditions and corroboration by recovery of stolen property — Failure to prove deadly weapon where alleged firearm not fired or recovered — Conviction on minor cognate offence under Trial on Indictments Act — Sentence considerations including remand time and prior military training.
|
12 September 2008 |
|
|
4 September 2008 |
|
Acquittal where identification was unreliable and recent-possession evidence was suspicious and unexplained.
* Criminal law – aggravated robbery – ingredients: theft, violence, deadly weapon, participation of accused; identification evidence of single witness. * Evidence – identification – failure to name assailant promptly; effect on credibility. * Evidence – recent possession – recovery of number plate; suspicious circumstances and need for police investigation testimony. * Circumstantial evidence – must exclude reasonable innocent hypothesis; prosecution burden to call investigating officers.
|
2 September 2008 |
|
Conviction for defilement based on in‑flagrante eyewitness and medical corroboration; sentenced to 13 years imprisonment.
* Criminal law – Defilement – Elements: penetration, victim under 18, identity of perpetrator. * Corroboration – medical evidence (ruptured hymen) and lay observation can corroborate eyewitness sexual-complaint. * Identification – caution required but in-flagrante observation by a familiar witness is reliable. * Proof of age – family testimony and medical assessment admissible. * Sentencing – aggravating circumstances (very young, mentally disabled victim), first offender status and remand credit considered.
|
2 September 2008 |
|
Flawed identification parade and precarious eyewitness identification led to acquittal despite proof of theft and use of a deadly weapon.
* Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – ingredients: theft, use of violence, use/threat of deadly weapon, participation of accused. * Identification evidence – single witness identification – necessity for favourable viewing conditions and corroborative support. * Identification parade – mandatory procedural safeguards; Police Form 69; non‑compliance may render identification unsafe. * Circumstantial evidence – recovery of stolen property from a relative’s house insufficient alone to convict.
|
1 September 2008 |
| August 2008 |
|
|
Child’s credible sworn testimony, supported by medical and lay examinations, upheld convictions for defilement and concurrent 15‑year sentences.
Criminal law – Defilement – Child witness evidence; sworn testimony of child of tender years; corroboration desirable but not mandatory; age and identity proof; medical and lay examination as corroboration.
|
29 August 2008 |
|
|
28 August 2008 |
|
Theft and threatened use of a knife were proved, but identity of the assailant was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – elements: theft; violence or threat; deadly weapon; participation of accused. * Evidence – threatened use of a kitchen knife can amount to a ‘deadly weapon’ even if not produced. * Identification – caution where prosecution relies on single/circumstantial identifying witness; inconsistencies may render identification unsafe. * Circumstantial evidence – must exclude all reasonable hypotheses of innocence before convicting.
|
20 August 2008 |
|
|
7 August 2008 |