Butt v Queen (criminal Appeal No. 200 of 1954)
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 held that substituting 'X' for a named person in the charge caused no prejudice where the accused understood throughout that 'X' referred to the named person. For official corruption under section 93(2) Penal Code, it is sufficient that the accused believed the police officer could use his official position to stop proceedings, regardless of whether the officer had formal legal authority to withdraw the charge. A three-year sentence for a Supreme Court clerk who attempted to corrupt a senior police officer with a substantial bribe was not excessive given the gravity of attempting to pervert justice.
Outcome
Appellant's conviction and sentence of three years' imprisonment with hard labour confirmed
Facts
The appellant, Mohamed Abdul Hamid Butt, was a clerk in the Supreme Court. On 19 November 1953 in Nairobi, he offered a bribe of Shs. 10,000 to J. Baker, an Assistant Superintendent of Police, to withdraw a criminal prosecution against one Kapur Chand which Baker had initiated. The appellant paid Shs. 5,000 immediately and withheld the remaining Shs. 5,000 until the prosecution was withdrawn. Baker, who was attached to the C.I.D. and in charge of the Investigation Branch when Kapur Chand was charged, did not prove venal and the matter proceeded to trial. The appellant was charged with official corruption under section 93(2) of the Penal Code. Before trial commenced, the prosecution amended the charge by substituting 'X' for 'Kapur Chand' to avoid potential prejudice to Kapur Chand's pending criminal trial. The appellant was convicted and sentenced to three years' imprisonment with hard labour.
Issues
- Whether substitution of 'X' for a named person in the particulars of a charge prejudiced the accused.
- Whether offering a bribe to a police officer to withdraw a criminal charge constitutes official corruption under section 93(2) of the Penal Code when the officer lacks legal capacity to formally withdraw the charge.
- Whether a sentence of three years' imprisonment with hard labour for bribery by a Supreme Court clerk was excessive.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Conviction confirmed.
- Sentence of three years' imprisonment with hard labour confirmed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
- Penal Code s.93(2)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.