<p class="ql-align-center">IN THE COURT OF APPEAL</p><p class="ql-align-center">AT NAKURU</p><p class="ql-align-center">(Coram: Masime, Gicheru and Kwach, JJA)</p><p class="ql-align-center">CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 97 OF 1989</p><p class="ql-align-center">KARIUKI.......................................................PLAINTIFF</p><p class="ql-align-center">VERSUS</p><p class="ql-align-center">REPUBLIC...................................................DEFENDANT</p><p class="ql-align-center">JUDGMENT</p><p class="ql-align-justify">September 26, 1989, Masime, Gicheru and Kwach, JJA delivered the following judgment.</p><p class="ql-align-justify">The appellant was convicted on his own plea of guilty of the offence of removing forest produce without a permit from the chief conservator contrary to section 8(1) (a)(i) of the Forests Act (cap 385), and fined Kshs 1,000 or 2 months imprisonment in default. His appeal to the High Court was summarily rejected under section 352 (2) of the Criminal procedure Code.</p><p class="ql-align-justify">The summary rejection of the appellant’s appeal was wrong for two reasons. First, the plea itself was not unequivocal.</p><p class="ql-align-justify">Secondly, the particulars on the charge sheet did not disclose an offence under section 8(1)(a)(i) because there is no allegation that the alleged offence, if any, was committed wi…</p>