AC 16 OF 2005 - K.P Wang'uru vs Benedict Ogada Abura
Summary: The accused person was charged in court with soliciting and receiving a bribe as an inducement to assist the complainant get acquitted in a criminal case against him. The complainant having grown tired of his case being constantly adjourned, approached the accused person who was also the prosecutor of that case asking what he could do. The prosecutor told him that the magistrate in court 1 had sent him to ask for 20,000/= for the case to be finalized, which was negotiated down to 10,000/= and 5,000/=. The accused reported the matter to KACC, where he was fitted with a recording device to verify the complaint and given treated money to take to the accused. The accused was arrested as he received the money from the complainant. The court noted that the complainant initiated the conversation leading to the arrest of the accused and that he had already accepted to give out money to be assisted, and therefore, he was an accomplice. It was also noted in court that it was not the complainant who reported the matter, rather, it was his brother, who was facing charges of giving false information to the police, and the false information touched on this case. As such, he was not a credible or truthful witness. Further, the IO was not sure what the demanded bribe was, which raised doubts. There was also a discrepancy between the IO's(10,000 or 5,000/=) and the complainant's(5,000/=) account of the demanded bribe money, which further raised doubts. The transcript presented in court did not have mention of 10,000 or 20,000. The complainant also was captured in the trasnscript referring to a contribution. It was therefore not clear whether the money given to the accused was a bribe or a contribution which the accused was collecting. The totality of these discrepancies and the unreliablility of key witnesses led the court to conclude that the prosecution case had serious doubts, and those doubts had to go to the accused person. Accused acquitted under 215 Criminal Procedure Code.
First offence date: 09/Aug/2005
Start date: 18/Nov/2005
Ruling date: 01/Jan/1970
Defendant plea:
Amount involved: KES 5,000.00
Type of case: Soliciting for a Benefit, Receiving a bribe
Resolution comments:
Charge
Plea
Fine amount
Judgement
Count 1 - Corruptly soliciting for a benefit contrary to Section 39(3)(a) as read with Section 48(1) of the Anti Corruption and Economic Crimes Act.
Not guilty
0.00
Acquittal
Count 2 - Corruptly receiving a benefit contrary to Section 39(3)(a) as read with Section 48(1) of the Anti Corruption and Economic Crimes Act
Not guilty
0.00
Acquittal