Rex v Adika and Others (Criminal Appeals Nos. 109, 110, 111 and 112 of 1939)
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 an accused person retains the right to appeal against a conviction even after the sentence has been dealt with in confirmation proceedings. Section 333 of the Criminal Procedure Code clearly preserves this right of appeal despite any order confirming the sentence, even where the confirmation court consisted of two or more judges.
Outcome
Right of appeal affirmed; appeals permitted to proceed
Facts
Four appellants sought to appeal to the Supreme Court from orders made against them in confirmation proceedings heard before two judges, whereby their original sentences were reduced. A member of the Court raised the question whether, in view of sections 11 and 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code, there was a right of appeal from orders made in confirmation proceedings. The Crown Counsel submitted that the invariable practice had been that the right of an accused person to appeal against a conviction prevails even though the sentence may have been confirmed.
Issues
- Whether an accused person has a right of appeal from an order made in confirmation proceedings under sections 11 and 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Orders
- Appeal allowed to proceed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
- Criminal Procedure Code s.11
- Criminal Procedure Code s.333
- Criminal Procedure Code s.340
Cases cited (1)
- Rex v Sironga and Another (7 E.A.L.R. 148)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.