Three people sentenced to 12-month jail for stealing bread, sugar worth Sh270

Picture of slices of bread and a glass of milk. [Courtesy]

The High Court has reduced a life sentence slapped on two adults and a teenager who were jointly accused of violently stealing bread, margarine and sugar.

In a trial that has been in court for six years now, Titus Kathukumi, Boniface Kigundi and a teenage boy named as NMK ended up with life in jail for allegedly using violence and stealing two loaves of bread, a half kilo of blue band margarine and one kilo of sugar, all worth Sh270.

They will, however, spend one year in jail after Justice Alfred Mabeya found that the complainant named John Mwiti never disclosed to the police what they had stolen from him.

The judge instead found that there was proof of assault.

The three were sentenced on January 29 this year by Chief Magistrate Wakahiu. Aggrieved by the sentence, they appealed before the High Court arguing that the evidence before the court was contradictory and weak.

In the case, Mwiti testified that on September 13, 2010 at around 7.30 pm, he was accosted by three people-one armed with a slasher while another had a stone.  He alleged that Kigundi demanded money from him but upon ransacking him, they found nothing.

At the time he had a paper bag containing 2 loaves of bread, 1kg of sugar and blue band.

The judge was told that NMK, 17 years, hit him on the right cheekbone with a stone while Kigundi slapped him.

 He made a distress call whereby his neighbour, Samuel Murithi came to rescue him but he was also beaten up.

 The three ran away with the paper bag.

Mwiti testified that he knew the three as they were his relatives. He, however, admitted that he did not mention the items stolen from him to the police.

His wife Catherine Kanyaru also testified.  She said she rushed to the scene and found him lying on the ground with injuries on the eye, lips and shoulder.

She took him to the hospital with the help of Murithi and another man named Christopher Mutuma.

The three denied the allegations and gave different accounts on where they were on the day they were accused of stealing.

Kathukumi told the court that he was tending to his cows and doing domestic work at his home and did not leave until 9.00pm.

 NMK, on the other hand, testified that he was in school and only left the school at 6.30pm. Upon arriving home, he did his homework and general cleaning up to 10.30pm. His testimony was supported by is eight-year-old sister, DK, who claimed that they were together at home.

Meanwhile, Kigundi testified that he is a carpenter and that on that day, he was building a house and after completion, he went home.

Justice Mabeya while faulting the lower court observed that the complaint was made the day after the assault hence the complainant would not have forgotten about the stolen items.

 He said that the Magistrate’s court ought to have convicted the three with assault and causing bodily harm.

“It is expected that at the time a complainant makes a report to the police, the incident is so fresh in his mind that it will be unlikely that a complainant can forget the details of the incident he is reporting. To my mind, it cannot be by coincidence that an important detail such as the loss of one’s possession would be forgotten both in the original report to the police as well as the statement. The original report, as well as the statement to the police, are too important to be trivialized,” ruled Justice Mabeya.