Choitram v Regina (Criminal Appeal No. 408 of 1952)
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
Where an accused counsels another to make a false statement to police and the material part of that statement is made, the accused is properly convicted even if the person counselled adds details unknown to the accused. The mode of committing the offence need only differ slightly from the mode advised for liability to attach. Conviction upheld where evidence established the statement was false and the appellant counselled its making with knowledge of falsity.
Outcome
Conviction upheld; appellant remains convicted of offence under Penal Code s.124
Facts
The appellant made a statement to police in Nairobi that he had handed a diamond necklace to a third party (agent) in Mombasa with instructions to have diamonds removed by a jeweller and brought to him. The prosecution alleged the appellant counselled the agent to confirm this statement. The agent initially denied receiving any necklace, but later made a second statement saying he had taken the appellant to a jeweller whose assistant removed diamonds and handed them to the appellant. The appellant, after learning of this second statement, made a further statement purporting to confirm it with minor variations. The magistrate convicted the appellant under Penal Code s.124 read with s.22(d) for counselling the giving of false information to police.
Issues
- Whether the appellant could be convicted of counselling another to give false information when the statement actually made by the person counselled differed in detail from the statement advised.
- Whether the statement made by the agent was false.
- Whether the appellant counselled the making of the material part of the false statement with knowledge of its falsity.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
- Penal Code s.124
- Penal Code s.22(d)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.