The prosecution conceded stating that there was doubt as to whether the two were identified as perpetrators and nothing was recovered from them.

The complainant, Mr Murakaru narrated to court that the suspects picked him at Chaka to carry vegetables in Mweiga but was requested to pick two men to help load the farm produce.


He said along the way the occupants ordered him to stop and grabbed his neck.

The court heard that he was beaten using fists from behind while being told he had disturbed them.

He said at some point he was about to lose consciousness as they tied his hands and left him at the scene.

While setting the suspects free, Lady Justice Rachel Ng'etich pointed out that the witnesses failed to connect the suspects with the stolen vehicle.


“The trial magistrate erred in believing prosecution evidence on identification by recognition yet the appellants were not known to the complainant before,” ruled the judge.

The trial court, the judge observed, should have warned itself of the dangers of relying on evidence of a single identifying witness and subject the evidence to test.

The court also noted that no enquiry was made as concern ownership of the vehicle since different registration numbers were given by the witnesses.

“Prosecution never amended the charge neither did the complainant avail ownership documents,” the judge said.

Page 2 of 2