Wakilii

Rex v Mashiki (Criminal Appeal No. 161 of 1939)

East African Court of Appeal · [1940] EACA 13 · 1940 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from conviction for murder in the High Court of Tanganyika
Decision
Appellant's conviction for murder upheld; appeal dismissed

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 the simultaneous trial of two informations against one person is not a nullity where the offences charged form part of one transaction and the accused has not been prejudiced or embarrassed in his defence. The Court distinguished between indictments under English law and informations under the Tanganyika Criminal Procedure Code, holding that an error in form (charging in separate informations rather than separate counts) is curable under section 335 where there is no prejudice to the accused. The appeal was dismissed and the conviction upheld.

Outcome

Appellant's conviction for murder upheld; appeal dismissed

Facts

The appellant shot a woman and her daughter at the same time and place with poisoned arrows, causing their deaths under circumstances amounting to murder. A separate information was filed in respect of each killing and the two informations were tried together in the High Court of Tanganyika. No objection to this procedure was taken at trial. The evidence with respect to each killing was identical and the killings clearly formed part of the same transaction. The appellant was convicted and appealed on the ground that trying two informations together rendered the trial a nullity.

Issues

  1. Whether the simultaneous trial of two separate informations against one person for two murders forming part of one transaction constitutes a nullity.
  2. Whether an error in form (charging in separate informations rather than separate counts) can be cured under section 335 of the Criminal Procedure Code where the accused has not been prejudiced or embarrassed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Conviction upheld.
  • Attention of His Excellency the Governor attracted to evidence regarding appellant's mentality.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Procedure — Joinder of Charges — Separate Informations Tried Together
The simultaneous trial of two informations against one person is not a nullity where the offences charged form part of one transaction and where the simultaneous trial has not prejudiced or embarrassed the accused in his defence.
Criminal Procedure — Informations Distinguished from Indictments
An information under the Tanganyika Criminal Procedure Code is not identical to an indictment under English law. The term 'information' was introduced to provide more elasticity and enable courts to administer justice freed from inherited technicalities applicable to indictments.
Criminal Procedure — Irregularity in Form — Section 335 Cure
Where the prosecution frames charges in separate informations instead of separate counts through inadvertence, this is merely an error in form and not in substance, and is curable under section 335 of the Criminal Procedure Code where the accused has not been prejudiced or embarrassed.
Criminal Procedure — Joint Trial — Test for Propriety
The test to be applied in considering whether a joint trial held not strictly in accordance with prescribed procedure shall be allowed to stand is whether there has been any prejudice or embarrassment to the accused.

Legislation cited (3)

  • Criminal Procedure Code (Tanganyika) s.233
  • Criminal Procedure Code (Tanganyika) s.335
  • Criminal Procedure Code (Tanganyika) s.132

Cases cited (11)

  • R v Saulos Ndima and another (3 EACA 34)
  • R v McDonnell (20 Cr App R 163)
  • R v Mongella s/o Ngui (1 EACA 152)
  • Rex v Odda Tore and Guyo Halake (1 EACA 114)
  • R v Ngidipe bin Kapirama and Others (Criminal Appeals Nos. 27-30 of 1939)
  • R v Giddings (174 ER 667)
  • R v Benfield (2 Burr 980, 97 ER 664)
  • R v Slator (8 QBD 267)
  • R v Ngidipi (Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 1939)
  • Suhrahmania Ayer case (1901 I.L.R. 25 Madras 61)
  • R v Lockett and Others (1914) 2 KB 730

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Mashiki (Criminal Appeal No. 161 of 1939) [1940] EACA 13 (1 January 1940)
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.