Rex v Deaf and Dumb (Criminal Case No. 75 of 1947)
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 Supreme Court held that the discretion conferred by section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code to pass such orders as it thinks fit in proceedings referred to it where an accused person has been unable to understand the proceedings in the lower court is very wide and not restricted to ordering detention during the Governor's pleasure. The Court may make various forms of order depending on the circumstances. In this case, involving a deaf mute convicted of robbery with violence who could not be made to understand his procedural rights, the Court ordered detention during the Governor's pleasure.
Outcome
Accused ordered detained during the Governor's pleasure
Facts
The accused, a deaf mute, was convicted by the Magistrate's Court, Nairobi, of robbery with violence contrary to section 289 of the Penal Code and sentenced to three years' imprisonment with hard labour. The accused appealed. The magistrate was able to communicate with the accused regarding the physical acts alleged against him (picking a man's pocket, hitting him on the head and running away) through signs and demonstration. However, the accused could not be made to understand the proceedings within the meaning of section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code, particularly his rights regarding cross-examination of witnesses, his rights under section 209, and the right to call witnesses in his defence. The sentence was set aside and the case remitted to the magistrate to furnish a report under section 167. The matter was then referred to the Supreme Court to make such order as it thought fit.
Issues
- Whether the discretion given to the Supreme Court under section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code, where an accused person has been unable to understand proceedings in the lower court, is restricted to ordering detention during the Governor's pleasure or extends to other orders.
Orders
- The accused be detained during the pleasure of His Excellency the Governor.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Criminal Procedure Code s.167
- Penal Code s.289
- Criminal Procedure Code s.209
- Criminal Procedure Code s.341
Cases cited (1)
- Rex v Kibet Arap Kibor (19 K.L.R. 100)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.