Bharaj and Another v Rex (Criminal Appeals Nos. 124 and 125 of 1945)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa held that it lacks jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal to the Privy Council in criminal matters. Following Chung Chuck v The King, the Court ruled that under the applicable Order in Council, applicants seeking to appeal criminal convictions to the Privy Council must apply directly to the Privy Council itself, not to the Court of Appeal.
Outcome
Applications dismissed; appellants must apply directly to Privy Council if they wish to pursue further appeal
Facts
The appellants had been convicted by the Resident Magistrate in Nairobi. Their appeals to the Supreme Court of Kenya were dismissed, and the Supreme Court judgment was affirmed. The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa subsequently dismissed their appeals. Following this final dismissal, the appellants applied to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal to the Privy Council in respect of their criminal convictions.
Issues
- Whether the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa has power to grant leave to appeal to the Privy Council in a criminal matter.
Orders
- Applications for leave to appeal to the Privy Council dismissed.
Rules and key headnotes
Cases cited (1)
- Chung Chuck v The King [1930] AC 244
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.