Rex v Loibori (Criminal Appeal No. 270 of 1948)
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 against conviction for robbery with violence. The identification evidence was sufficient, supported by an identification parade and physical description matching the appellant. The alibi defence failed. However, the Court observed that specimen information forms stating only a vast territorial area as the place of offence may not comply with the Criminal Procedure Code requirement to indicate place with reasonable clearness.
Outcome
Conviction for robbery with violence upheld
Facts
The appellant was convicted of robbery with violence. The complainant was robbed at night but identified the appellant at an identification parade. The complainant had opportunity to recognize his assailant during a hand-to-hand struggle with car lights on. The complainant's description included reference to a physical peculiarity of the eyes consistent with the appellant's squint. The appellant claimed he was in Moshi, 50 miles away, on the date of the offence. His alibi witness failed to corroborate his presence in Moshi on the material date. Prosecution evidence established the appellant was in his native village of Kichenga, within walking distance of the crime scene, just before and after the offence date.
Issues
- Whether the information complied with the requirements of sections 135 and 138(f) of the Criminal Procedure Code in describing the place of the offence.
- Whether the identification evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for robbery with violence.
- Whether the appellant's alibi defence raised reasonable doubt as to his presence at the scene of the crime.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Penal Code s.285
- Criminal Procedure Code s.135
- Criminal Procedure Code s.138(f)
- Criminal Procedure Code Second Schedule
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.