Rex v Meghji and Another (Criminal Appeals Nos. 5 and 6 of 1945 (Consolidated))
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 held that the existence of a judicial proceeding is an essential ingredient of the offence under section 116(1)(f) of the Penal Code. The prosecution's failure to adduce evidence proving that a judicial proceeding existed at the time of the alleged offence was fatal to the conviction. The appeals were allowed and the accused acquitted.
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged
Facts
The appellants were convicted of attempting wrongfully to interfere with or influence a witness named Kariuki in a judicial proceeding, contrary to section 116(1)(f) of the Penal Code. The alleged offence took place on the afternoon of 17 February 1944. At trial, the prosecution failed to lead evidence proving that a judicial proceeding was in existence at the time of the alleged offence. No court clerk was called to produce a case file or otherwise establish that judicial proceedings were ongoing on that date.
Issues
- Whether proof of the existence of a judicial proceeding is an essential ingredient of the offence under section 116(1)(f) of the Penal Code of attempting wrongfully to interfere with or influence a witness in a judicial proceeding.
Orders
- Appeals allowed.
- Convictions and sentences quashed.
- Accused acquitted.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
- Penal Code s.116(1)(f)
Cases cited (1)
- Archbold, 31st Edition, 1198
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.