CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 43 OF 2011 - Tobias Musyoki Mutua vs Republic
Summary: This appeal arose from the trial and subsequent conviction of the appellant on charges of solicitation and receiving a bribe. The facts of the case are that the accused person was arraigned in court to answer to three counts of solicitation and one count of receiving a bribe as an inducement to forebear charging the complainant's husband with robbery with violence. The complaint was reported to KACC offices where officers facilitated recordings to verify the complaint and prepared trap money which they used to nab the accused as he received it. The court in reviewing the tape recordings, the video evidence and the totality of the evidence before it was convinced that the accused person did solicit and receive a bribe, and accordingly convicted the accused person on all counts. The appellant appealed the conviction and sentence of grounds that; The appellant’s rights were violated as he had been held in police custody for more than twenty-four (24) hours; The evidence adduced from the tape was not audible and convincing; The evidence of the prosecution witnesses was not corroborated and could not support a conviction; The trial court rejected the appellants defence without giving reasons; and The sentence was harsh and excessive. Counsel for the state conceded the appeal. In reviewing the record of evidence before it the court found that the prosecution did not table evidence that the Attorney General gave written consent for the prosecution of the appellant as was required by law. The appeal was allowed and the appellant was acquitted on all 4 counts.
First offence date: 20/May/2007
Start date: 29/May/2007
Ruling date: 01/Jan/1970
Defendant plea:
Amount involved: KES 100,000.00
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
Appeal allowed
Count 2 - 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
Appeal allowed
Count 3 - 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
Appeal allowed
Count 4 - 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
Appeal allowed