SAFLII [Home] [Databases] [WorldLII] [Search] [Feedback]

Botswana: Court of Appeal

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> Botswana: Court of Appeal >> 1986 >> [1986] BWCA 15

[Database Search] [Name Search] [Recent Decisions] [Noteup] [Help]

Nkwe v The State (Criminal Appeal No. 34/86 ) [1986] BWCA 15; [1986] B.L.R. 37 (CA) (16 July 1986)

PDF of original document.PDF of original document

.RTF of original document

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BOTSWANA
Criminal Appeal No. 34/86
High Court Appeal No.28/85 Criminal Trial No. G258/84

In the matter of
DAVID NKWE
vs
THE STATE
Appellant
Respondent

Appellant in person
Mr. S.A. Afful for the State

JUDGMENT
CORAM: I. A. MAISELS JP L. De VAN WINSEN A.N.E. AMISSAH JA
MAISELS, JP:
The appellant was convicted in the magistrate's court on a charge of robbery. It was found that, he together with other persons robbed the Manager of Pelagano Village Industries. It is clear that there was a robbery and that it was a brutal one.
The appellant was indicted with three other persons, one of whom disappeared and the other two were acquitted. As far as the appellant was concerned, he was convicted and if he was correctly convicted I am bound to say he fully deserved the sentence imposed on him. The only evidence connecting the appellant with the crime was the evidence of
2/      

2.
a palm print that was said to have been found on the door of the premises where this robbery took place, and which it was alleged was the palm print of the appellant.
Mr. Afful who appears for the State has submitted very fairly that it would be unsafe to allow the conviction to stand because of the unsatisfactory manner in which the palm prints of the appellant were obtained and produced in court. We think there is substance in what Mr. Afful has said and the Court is indebted to him for drawing our attention to the unsatisfactory nature of this evidence and this is the only evidence against the appellant. It would follow that it would be unsafe to allow the conviction to stand with the result that this appeal must be allowed and conviction and sentence set aside.
There is one further matter to which I wish to refer. In granting leave to appeal, Murray J. drew attention to the fact that the appeal in the High Court was dismissed by the learned Chief Justice and judgment was subsequently written. .. Murray J* queried whether this was the appropriate procedure to dismiss or allow an appeal and to give reasons later. There is no substance in this query. It is normal procedure for a court to come to a conclusion and to state reasons therefor will be given subsequently. This has been done in different courts frequently but quite apart from that, and it may be in the interests of justice in any particular case, that when a court has come to a decision to give the result and to say that the reasons
would be given later.
3/      

3.
This appeal is allowed, the conviction and sentence are set aside.


I agree
I. A. MAISELS Judge president

L. De VAN WINSEN Judge of Appeal


I agree
AMISSAH
Judge of Appeal

GIVEN at the Court of Appeal, Lobatse, this 16th day of July, 1986.

SAFLII: | Terms of Use | Feedback
URL: http://www.saflii.org/bw/cases/BWCA/1986/15.html