Gichimu v Rex
Gichimu v Rex (Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 1951) [1951] EACA 311 (1 January 1951)
The conviction was quashed because the charge as framed did not disclose an offence known to law, and the plea of guilty was wrongly recorded due to ambiguity and misleading particulars. The defect in the charge was not mere surplusage; it materially affected the accused's understanding of the offence. The appellate court found that the accused was prejudiced by the inaccurate phrasing, and the conviction could not stand. The order of forfeiture was also quashed as it was dependent on the conviction. The court distinguished between curable defects and those that render a conviction unsustaina…
Source excerpt
- Defective Charge
- Animal Diseases Ordinance
- Plea Of Guilty
- Forfeiture Order
- Amendment Of Charge
- Nullity Of Trial