- Flynote
- Criminal law
- Case summary
- Court held that medical examination evidence presented by the prosecution was not conclusive on the age of the appellant. Court added that since court was unsure about the age of the appellant, it should have decided in his favour. Court also held that since the appellant was 17 at the time of commission of the offence, the high court had no jurisdiction to sentence him, instead the Family and children court should have convicted him to a maximum of three years. Court accordingly quashed the conviction and 12 year sentence and release the appellant on the basis that he had already served his maximum 3 sentence.
