|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2016 |
|
|
Criminal law|Burden of Proof
|
23 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law
|
23 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law
|
23 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law
|
23 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law
|
23 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Burden of Proof
|
23 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Burden of Proof
|
19 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Burden of Proof
|
15 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Evidence Law
|
9 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Evidence Law
|
8 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law
|
1 December 2016 |
|
Criminal law
|
1 December 2016 |
| November 2016 |
|
|
Criminal law
|
28 November 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Burden of Proof
|
18 November 2016 |
|
Criminal law
|
18 November 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Burden of Proof
|
18 November 2016 |
|
Late guilty pleas afford limited mitigation for aggravated robbery; each accused sentenced to 21 years with remand credit.
* Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – use of deadly weapon and causing bodily harm – serious offence warranting deterrent sentence; * Guilty plea – late (mid-trial) pleas afford limited mitigation where trial has substantially proceeded; * Sentencing – mitigation: youth, first offender status, remorse, ill-health, remand credit; * Remedy – custodial sentence imposed; compensation not ordered in sentencing statement.
|
15 November 2016 |
|
Criminal law
|
14 November 2016 |
|
Prosecution failed to prove aggravated robbery due to inconsistent evidence, unreliable witnesses, and identification weaknesses.
Criminal law – Aggravated robbery: elements (theft; violence; use/threat of deadly weapon; participation); burden of proof on prosecution; identification evidence; alibi; witness credibility; failure to exhibit weapons or recovered property.
|
14 November 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Evidence Law
|
14 November 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Evidence Law
|
11 November 2016 |
|
Bail denied for an accused committed for trial due to gravity of charge, victim vulnerability, and risk to prosecution integrity.
Criminal procedure – Bail pending trial – Accused committed for trial under Trial on Indictments Act – Exceptional circumstances and judicial discretion; balancing presumption of innocence with protection of a vulnerable child-victim and integrity of prosecution; ability to craft enforceable bail conditions; risk of absconding and interference with witnesses.
|
10 November 2016 |
|
Accused acquitted where prosecution failed to prove recent sexual act and accused's involvement beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – Elements: age of victim; occurrence of sexual act; identity of perpetrator – proof beyond reasonable doubt.
* Evidentiary issues – medical evidence vs complainant testimony; absence of recent clinical signs undermining allegation of recent sexual intercourse.
* Identification and credibility – inconsistencies in witness accounts and possible motive/grudge affecting credibility.
|
10 November 2016 |
|
Criminal law
|
10 November 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Evidence Law
|
10 November 2016 |
|
Medical incapacity during trial can justify an out‑of‑time appeal; impecuniosity without arguable grounds does not.
Criminal procedure — Extension of time to appeal under s.28(6) & s.31(1) — Good cause required — Impecuniosity alone insufficient — Medical incapacity and inability to present defence can constitute good cause where arguable grounds exist.
|
8 November 2016 |
|
Bail refused for accused of child murder in domestic context due to risk to victims, witnesses and inadequate sureties.
Bail — Murder — Domestic/family violence context — Discretion under Trial on Indictments Act — Exceptional circumstances required — Safety of victims and witnesses — Adequacy of sureties — Risk of interference and mob justice.
|
4 November 2016 |
|
Applicant failed to prove exceptional circumstances; domestic‑violence murder allegations and witness risk warranted denial of bail.
* Criminal procedure – Bail – Indicted persons ordinarily require proof of "exceptional circumstances" to obtain bail under the Trial on Indictments Act; courts retain discretion. * Evidence – Advanced age as exceptional circumstance requires independent corroboration where affidavit alone is insufficient. * Domestic/family violence – Increased risk of interference with witnesses and danger to victims; courts must prioritize safety when considering bail. * Sureties and conditions – Necessity that sureties be substantial and capable of guaranteeing compliance and protection of witnesses.
|
4 November 2016 |
|
An indicted person of advanced age may be granted bail where no real risk of absconding or interfering with the prosecution exists.
Criminal procedure – Bail for an indicted person – Exceptional circumstances (advanced age) – Risk of absconding or interfering with witnesses – Suitability and conditions of sureties and bonds.
|
1 November 2016 |
| October 2016 |
|
|
Applicant charged with rape granted bail after court found fixed abode and substantial sureties mitigated absconding risk.
Criminal procedure – Bail – Right to apply for bail under the Constitution – Primary consideration is prevention of absconding – Fixed place of abode within jurisdiction and substantial sureties – Special circumstances not mandatory for bail in capital offences.
|
25 October 2016 |
|
Bail refused due to uncertain residence and unsatisfactory surety despite constitutional presumption of innocence.
* Criminal procedure – Bail – constitutional right balanced against requirements for fixed abode and substantial sureties.
* Evidence – Affidavit by illiterate deponent – requirement of certificate of translation under Illiterates Protection Act.
* Judicial discretion – when to consider defective affidavits and oral testimony.
* Bail prerequisites – certainty of residence and informed, substantial sureties to prevent absconding.
|
20 October 2016 |
|
Medical evidence and daylight identification corroborated the victim, the accused’s alibi failed, and he was convicted of aggravated defilement.
* Criminal law – Sexual offences – Aggravated defilement – Elements: victim under 14, sexual act (penetration), identity of assailant – proof beyond reasonable doubt. * Evidence – Corroboration in sexual offences – medical report and immediate complaint can corroborate victim’s testimony. * Evidence – Alibi – inconsistencies and admissions in police statement can destroy alibi. * Identification – daylight identification by a known complainant can suffice as sole identifying evidence.
|
19 October 2016 |
|
Child’s credible testimony and medical evidence established aggravated defilement despite alleged inconsistencies and claims of a frame-up.
* Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – elements: age, sexual act (penetration), identity of perpetrator.
* Medical evidence – absence of hymen, swollen tender genitalia, timing of injuries corroborating recent penetration.
* Evidence – credibility of child witness; corroboration by medical reports and complainant’s statement under s.40(3) Trial on Indictments Act.
* Contradictions – minor inconsistencies in witness accounts not amounting to reasonable doubt.
* Motive/Allegation of frame-up – assessed and rejected as implausible by the court.
|
13 October 2016 |
|
Bail denied for lack of proof of fixed abode and substantial sureties amid real risk of absconding.
Bail — Article 23(6) Constitution; Trial on Indictment Act s.14 — requirement of fixed place of abode and substantial sureties; evidentiary weight of national IDs and need for corroboration (LC certification or documentary proof); risk of absconding heightened by capital offence; counsel’s duty to present supporting evidence.
|
12 October 2016 |
|
Bail refused where sureties were not credible and false statements undermined assurance of appearance.
Bail — constitutional right vs. judicial discretion (Art 23(6)(a)) — primary purpose: secure attendance — sureties must be credible, mature, and geographically/familially proximate — material falsehoods/perjury by applicant or sureties defeat bail.
|
12 October 2016 |
|
Court convicted two accused of murder on identification and circumstantial evidence; third accused acquitted for insufficient linkage.
Criminal law – Murder: elements (death, unlawfulness, malice aforethought, identification); circumstantial and direct evidence; common intention (s.20 Penal Code Act); identification and vehicle inspection; weight of audio/video recordings; benefit of doubt and acquittal where linkage is insufficient.
|
12 October 2016 |
|
Conviction for aggravated defilement where a child’s unsworn account was corroborated by eyewitness and medical evidence.
Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – elements: age of victim, sexual act, identity of assailant; Identification in familiar environment; Corroboration of unsworn child evidence s.40(3) Trial on Indictments Act; Medical evidence as corroboration; Admissibility of victim’s report to third party (identification of assailant).
|
11 October 2016 |
|
Retraction, inducement and language defects in a confession plus unestablished causation led to acquittal for murder.
* Criminal law – murder – elements: death, unlawfulness, malice aforethought, participation.* Confession law – Charge and Caution statements – promises/inducements and language barriers may render a retracted confession unreliable.* Corroboration – a retracted confession requires independent corroborative evidence to sustain conviction.* Medical evidence – a post-mortem silent on causation may be insufficient to establish culpable causation.
|
10 October 2016 |
|
Court accepted the accused's guilty plea for aggravated defilement but increased the agreed 10-year term to 15 years.
* Criminal law – Aggravated defilement (child under 14) – plea bargaining – court’s discretion to accept, reject or vary agreed sentence; aggravating factor: victim’s very young age; mitigating factors: accused’s youth, disability, first offender status, time on remand; sentence increased to 15 years.
|
6 October 2016 |
|
The accused pleaded guilty to three rapes; court imposed consecutive eight-year terms balancing plea discount and aggravating factors.
* Criminal law – Plea bargaining – Validity of plea: voluntary, intelligent plea with factual basis required. * Sentencing – Rape – consideration of aggravating factors (HIV status, force, multiple victims) and mitigating factors (first offender, remand time, ill-health). * Sentencing discretion – concurrent vs consecutive sentences where multiple victims are separately violated. * Plea discount – guilty plea before trial may justify reduction from tariff applied after full trial.
|
6 October 2016 |
|
The accused’s voluntary guilty plea to murder was accepted and he was sentenced to ten years' imprisonment.
* Criminal law – Plea bargaining – voluntariness and factual basis required before accepting a guilty plea; * Sentencing – Murder (s.188/189 Penal Code) – consideration of Sentencing Guidelines and comparative authorities; * Sentencing – balancing aggravating factors (seriousness, prevalence) and mitigating factors (remand duration, ill-health, dependent family, first offender).
|
6 October 2016 |
|
Court accepted the accused's plea bargain and sentenced him to seven years for aggravated robbery; no compensation ordered.
* Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – plea bargaining – acceptance of guilty plea – voluntariness and factual basis.
* Sentencing – application of Sentencing Guidelines and precedents – mitigation: lengthy remand, HIV status, youth/education.
* Relief – no compensation ordered where stolen property recovered (s.286(4) Penal Code Act).
|
6 October 2016 |
|
Guilty plea for aggravated defilement accepted; court reduced proposed 15-year sentence to 10 years due to age and infirmity.
Criminal law – Plea bargaining – Court’s discretion to accept or reject sentence terms of plea agreements; Sentencing – Aggravated defilement involving HIV exposure of a child – balancing aggravating factors (victim’s age, HIV exposure, age disparity) against mitigating factors (advanced age, serious ill-health/blindness, first offender, remand time); Application of sentencing guidelines and precedent.
|
6 October 2016 |
|
Applicant charged with murder granted bail pending trial upon proof of fixed abode and satisfactory sureties.
* Criminal procedure – Bail pending trial – Article 23(6)(a) Constitution and Section 14 Trial on Indictments Act – Section 14 not absolute; court may grant bail absent special circumstances if attendance at trial is assured. * Bail conditions – fixed place of abode, substantial sureties, cash and bond amounts, periodic reporting. * Seriousness of charge – does not automatically bar bail.
|
5 October 2016 |
| September 2016 |
|
|
Accused convicted on guilty plea for two murders and aggravated robbery sentenced to concurrent 20-year terms, remand deducted.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Murder and aggravated robbery – Guilty plea – Mitigating factors (first offender, youth, family responsibility, plea) – Concurrent sentences – Credit for time on remand – Trial of co-accused to proceed.
|
27 September 2016 |
|
Prosecution failed to prove aggravated robbery: theft, weapon use linkage and participation were not established.
* Criminal law - aggravated robbery - elements: theft, use/threat of deadly weapon, grievous harm, participation - requirement that each ingredient be proved beyond reasonable doubt. * Identification - reliability of witness identification at night and where complainant lost consciousness. * Forensic evidence - insufficiency of DNA/forensic linkage and issues of chain of custody. * Burden on prosecution to rebut defence explanation and establish continuity of exhibits.
|
26 September 2016 |
|
Child’s unsworn identification, prompt complaint and medical findings corroborated prosecution; accused convicted of aggravated defilement.
* Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – elements: victim under 14, sexual act, identity of accused. * Identification evidence – single child witness – need for caution where unsworn. * Corroboration – immediate complaint to parent and medical evidence can corroborate unsworn child evidence. * Alibi – inconsistencies and implausibility may lead to rejection.
|
24 September 2016 |
|
Failure to prove the victim was under 14 reduced aggravated defilement to a conviction for simple defilement.
* Criminal law – Defilement – aggravated defilement v. simple defilement – requirement that victim be under 14 years.* Evidence – proof of age – reliability of medical age estimation, school ID and birth certificate produced after the offence.* Evidence – proof of sexual intercourse – victim testimony corroborated by medical examination.* Identification – conditions of identification, corroboration by family witness and arrest at scene.* Procedure – Trial on Indictments Act s.87 – conviction of lesser cognate offence where elements of charged offence not proved.
|
21 September 2016 |
|
Whether a former teacher remains a "person in authority" and whether circumstantial evidence suffices for aggravated defilement conviction.
* Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – elements: victim under 18, sexual act, person in authority, identity of perpetrator; sufficiency of circumstantial evidence.
* Statutory interpretation – "person in authority" under s.129(4)(c) construed purposively to include teacher–pupil fiduciary relationship continuing until majority.
* Evidence – admissibility of facts discovered as a consequence of information from an accused (discovery exception); victim’s hearsay reports to third parties as corroborative evidence.
* Sentencing – application of sentencing guidelines, consideration of aggravating/mitigating factors and set-off for remand time.
|
20 September 2016 |
|
Appeal allowed for misdirection on identification and failure to obtain mandatory High Court confirmation of sentence.
Criminal law – identification evidence – delay in reporting and preservation of alleged weapon – reliability and credibility; Medical report inconsistencies with alleged date of injury; Procedural law – sentencing: mandatory High Court confirmation under section 173 for sentences exceeding two years; Miscarriage of justice for failure to warn on mistaken identity.
|
17 September 2016 |