ANTI- CORRUPTION CRIMINAL APPEAL 12 OF 2016 - Samuel Kibet Cheruiyot vs Republic
Summary: This appeal arose from the trial and subsequent conviction of the appellant on charges of soliciting and receiving a bribe. The facts of the case were that the appellant was charged in court with soliciting and receiving a bribe from the complainant as an inducement so as to assist him in reconnection of disconnected power supply in his premises. Power connection at the complainant's premises had been tampered with, which prompted the complainant to report the matter at KPLC offices, who came to the site and verified the same. Later, they came and reconnected supply to one person only. The complainant went back to KPLC to complain, at which point he encountered the accused person who demanded a 20,000/= bribe for reconnection, later negotiated down to 10,000/=. The complainant reported the matter to Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission, where officials facilitated recordings and treated money to give to the accused person, who was promptly arrested as he received it. The court noted that the evidence adduced in court did not make reference to events happening on the date established in count 1, and therefore acquitted him under S 215 Criminal Procedure Code as no case was established. As for count 2 and 3, the court noted that from the transcripts, the demand for a bribe was evident and the intention was to facilitate the reconnection of power. Swabs also confirmed that the accused person had received the money, which was corroborated by witness testimony. The court found the accused person guilty in count 2 and 3 and convicted him under Section 215 Criminal Procedure Code. The appellant appealed the decision and conviction on grounds that the Prosecution failed to get the Director of Public Prosecution's consent before prosecuting the case, and that there wasn't sufficient evidence on record to sustain a conviction. The court concluded that the presence of prosecuting counsel in court as representatives of the DPP was by implication consent by the DPP. The court also found that the trial court analysed the evidence on record well and arrived at the right decision. The appeal was dismissed.
First offence date: 09/Sep/2015
Start date: 13/Jul/2015
Ruling date: 01/Jan/1970
Defendant plea:
Amount involved: KES 20,000.00
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 dismissed
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 dismissed