JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
1. Our mandate in a second appeal such as the case before us is clearly spelt out under Section 361 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code as being restricted to consideration of matters of law only. We reiterate the well-established principle that we are obligated to give deference to the concurrent findings of facts by the two courts below for the obvious reason we did not have the opportunity to observe the witnesses as they testified. Be that as it may, we are not bound by such conclusions where we are satisfied that they are not supported by the evidence or are based on perversion of evidence. See this Court’s decision in Ahamad Abolfathi Mohamed and Another v. R [2018] eKLR.
2. With the foregoing in mind, the background facts of the appeal were that on 4th January, 2007 at around 9:00 p.m. while Paul Sonko Mark Lutaaya (PW1) was driving along Githurai Kimbo Estate both his vehicle and the one in front of him got stuck in the mud. Before he could take any action h…