Chavde and Another v City Council of Nairobi (Criminal Appeal No. 81 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
Held that section 348(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code bars appeals only where a fine not exceeding Sh. 100 is imposed alone. Where a fine of Sh. 100 is accompanied by an order for costs, the costs constitute a penalty forming part of the sentence. The restriction on appeal does not apply and the right of appeal under section 347(1) is not barred.
Outcome
Appeal allowed to proceed
Facts
The magistrate convicted the appellants and sentenced each to pay a fine of Sh. 100 with an ancillary order for costs of Sh. 8, or in default one month's imprisonment. The appellants appealed. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the appeal was incompetent because section 348(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code does not allow an appeal where any fine imposed does not exceed Sh. 100 only.
Issues
- Whether an appeal lies under section 348(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code where the magistrate imposed a fine of Sh. 100 together with an order for costs of Sh. 8.
- Whether an order for costs constitutes a penalty forming part of the sentence for purposes of determining the right of appeal.
Orders
- Preliminary objection dismissed.
- Right of appeal confirmed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
- Criminal Procedure Code s.348(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code s.172
- Criminal Procedure Code s.347(1)
Cases cited (1)
- Hirji Megliji and Company v R (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 1953)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.