JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Although the appellant and another were jointly charged with three counts of robbery with violence contrary to section 296(2) of the Penal Code, the only incriminating evidence against the appellant was that of PW1 and PW4, both of whom were the complainants in counts 1 and 3, respectively. The complainant in count 2 who was the husband of PW1 was categorical that he was not able to identify any of the people who robbed him. This evidence notwithstanding the learned trial magistrate still went ahead to convict the appellant on this count. It was the evidence of PW1 and PW4, as corroborated by that of three police officers, (PW2, PW5 and PW7), that formed the basis of the prosecution case, which in turn led to the conviction of the appellant.
That evidence was to the effect that in the early hours of the morning of 16th August 2002 at about 2.30 a.m. PW1 and her husband (PW3) returned home from an outing and while her husband went to the back of the house to get som…