Cookie Policy
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
The appellant, David Koech Kotut, has come to us on second appeal against his conviction and sentence on two counts, the first of which was robbery contrary to section 296 (1) of the Penal Code and the second of burglary contrary to section 304 (2) and stealing contrary to section 279 (b) of the Penal Code, respectively. In the robbery count, the appellant was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment with hard labour, and a term of 3 years imprisonment on the second count. Clearly, the trial magistrate omitted to impose a sentence on the second limb of the second count, namely, stealing contrary to section 279 (b) of the Penal Code. Burglary is a distinct offence from stealing in a dwelling house. The rules for drafting charges permit the charging in one count of the two offences and the imposition of separate sentences for each limb of that count.
We note that the first appellate court did not notice this omission and we consider that the error should be corrected. But fâŚ