JMM V. REPUBLIC

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

This is a first appeal from the Judgment of the High Court sitting in first instance, and it is our duty to re-evaluate the evidence and reach our own conclusions – see the oft-cited case of Okeno v. Republic [1972] E.A. 32 where the predecessor of this Court had this to say of that mandate:

“An Appellant on a first appeal is entitled to expect the evidence as a whole to be submitted to a fresh and exhaustive examination (Pandya v. Republic (1957) EA. (336) and the appellate court’s own decision on the evidence. The first appellate court must itself weigh conflicting evidence and draw its own conclusion. (Shantilal M. Ruwala v. R. (1957) EA. 570). It is not the function of a first appellate court merely to scrutinize the evidence to see if there was some evidence to support the lower court’s finding and conclusion; it must make its own findings and draw its own conclusions. Only then can it decide whether the magistrate’s findings should be supported. In doing so, …