Crown v Wairisha wa Karegi (Confirmation Case No. 300 of 1928)
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 the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance do not derogate from the earlier Stock and Produce Theft Ordinance. A third class subordinate court has jurisdiction to impose a fine of ten times the value of stock or produce stolen under section 3 of the Stock and Produce Theft Ordinance, even if the resulting fine exceeds the limit of £20 set by section 17(3) of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance.
Outcome
Conviction and sentence confirmed
Facts
The accused was convicted by a third class Magistrate of theft of stock or produce. The Magistrate imposed a fine of ten times the value of the stolen property as required by section 3 of the Stock and Produce Theft Ordinance. The fine exceeded Sh. 400, which was the maximum fine a third class Magistrate could ordinarily impose under section 17(3) of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance. The case came before the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa on confirmation.
Issues
- Whether a third class Magistrate has power to impose a fine exceeding Sh. 400 in cases under the Stock and Produce Theft Ordinance.
Orders
- Sentence confirmed.
- Sentence of rigorous imprisonment to run from the date of conviction.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
- Stock and Produce Theft Ordinance Cap. 79 s.3
- Criminal Procedure Ordinance Cap. 7 s.17(3)
Cases cited (1)
- Confirmation Case 576/1926
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.