JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Although the appellant, whose first appeal was dismissed by the High Court now challenges that dismissal in this Court on nine (9) grounds of which only seven (7) were argued by Mr. Nyaga, his advocate, we think, the only question the appeal raises is essentially whether the appellant was properly identified. This is because when the complainant was ambushed while driving his pick-up motor vehicle No. KZY 041 by a group of people the time was estimated as 10pm. He was driving slowly on account of the rough state of the road when he realized a person had boarded the pick up at the rear. The person had removed the spare tyre from the back of the pickup. The complainant stopped and came out to face the person. It is at this stage, with the help of electricity light from the nearby kiosks and moonlight that he noticed that there were in fact four men trying to steal from him. He confronted the one who had mounted the pickup and sought to know why he had removed the sp…