Mwanja v Rex (Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 1949)
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 dismissed the appeal but held that when a trial judge visits the scene of a crime and makes notes of observations, those notes must be read out in court and opportunity given to call evidence on any point in the notes. Statements made by the judge based on observations at the locus, if made by a prosecution witness, would be subject to cross-examination, and the accused must have the same opportunity to challenge them.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Facts
The appellant was convicted in the High Court of Tanganyika. During the trial, the learned judge, accompanied by the accused, his advocate, and the assessors, visited the locus in quo. The judge made notes of his observations, including a statement about gaps in a hedge through which a spear was allegedly thrown. The judge recorded that the gaps were such that one would be fortunate to throw a spear through the hedge without its flight being impeded. A rough plan made by the judge was agreed by both advocates, but it did not clearly appear from the record that all the judge's notes of his observations were read out in court.
Issues
- Whether the trial judge's notes made during a view of the locus in quo must be read out in court and opportunity given to call evidence on any point in the notes.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
Rules and key headnotes
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.