Wakilii

Rex v Cherono and Another (Consolidated Cr. Apps. 43 and 44-1933.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1933] EACA 19 · 1933 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Consolidated criminal appeals from murder convictions
Decision
Appellants' murder convictions upheld

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 three persons armed with lethal weapons set out with the common intention to steal goats, and one of them kills the custodian to fulfill that purpose, all are liable for murder under section 189 of the Penal Code. Malice aforethought is established when death is caused with intent to commit a felony involving violence against the person killed. The appellants' use of dangerous weapons demonstrated a common intention to use violence to effect the theft.

Outcome

Appellants' murder convictions upheld

Facts

Three men, including the two appellants and an absconding confederate named Chepsang, set out armed with spears, simes, and rungus to steal goats. They encountered an elderly Kikuyu man named Ndono guarding a flock with two boys. One appellant threw a stone to intimidate Ndono, who stood his ground and threw wood at them. The appellants retaliated by throwing stones and rungus, and one thrust a spear into Ndono's buttocks, inflicting a fatal wound. After Ndono succumbed, the three men stole the goats. The trial court found that neither appellant inflicted the fatal wound, which was probably delivered by the absconding Chepsang, but convicted both appellants of murder.

Issues

  1. Whether persons who set out with the common intention to commit theft armed with lethal weapons are guilty of murder when one of them kills the custodian of the property in furtherance of that felony.

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Murder — Malice Aforethought — Common Intention to Commit Felony
Where multiple persons set out with a common intention to commit theft armed with lethal weapons, and one of them kills the custodian of the property in furtherance of that felony, all are liable to be convicted of murder under section 189 of the Penal Code, even if they did not personally inflict the fatal wound.
Murder — Malice Aforethought — Intent to Commit Felony Involving Violence
Malice aforethought under section 189 of the Penal Code is established when death is caused with intent to commit a felony that involves the employment of violence against the person killed.
Murder — Joint Enterprise — Use of Dangerous Weapons
Where persons armed with dangerous weapons use violence with those weapons to effect a theft, demonstrating a common intention to use violence to the extreme if necessary, they are guilty of murder when one of them inflicts a fatal wound, as the infliction of dangerous wounds is the probable consequence of using such weapons against a person standing his ground.

Legislation cited (3)

  • Penal Code s.186
  • Penal Code s.189
  • Penal Code s.22

Cases cited (1)

  • Director of Public Prosecutions v Beard [1920] AC 479

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Rex v Cherono and Another (Consolidated Cr. Apps. 43 and 44-1933.) [1933] EACA 19 (1 January 1933)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.