The High Court has upheld the conviction and sentencing of a man found guilty of trafficking over 18 kilograms of cannabis along the Marsabit–Isiolo highway. The man had appealed the magistrate’s court decision, challenging both the guilty verdict and the sentence imposed, but the High Court dismissed his appeal, affirming that the original decision was based on overwhelming evidence.
The case originated when the accused was stopped at a police checkpoint while driving alone in a vehicle from Marsabit. Upon inspection, police officers discovered several suspicious packages hidden in the dashboard compartments. Forensic analysis later confirmed that the recovered substance was cannabis sativa, weighing over 18kg. The accused was consequently charged with drug trafficking under Section 4(a)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act, as amended in 2022.
During the trial, the prosecution presented multiple witnesses including police officers and a government chemist. Key evidence included the seized narcotics, vehicle photographs, a weighing certificate, and an inventory signed by the accused. According to testimony, the accused was in sole control of the vehicle and did not contest the documentation during trial.
In his defense, the accused claimed he was unaware of the contents hidden in the vehicle and stated he had been hired merely to drive it. He pointed to inconsistencies in the vehicle’s registration as cited by different witnesses, arguing this undermined the prosecution’s credibility. He also challenged the absence of certain expert witnesses.
The High Court, however, found these arguments unpersuasive. It ruled that the registration number discrepancies were minor typographical errors and did not affect the case’s substance. The court emphasized that the accused admitted under cross-examination that the drugs were found in his car and had voluntarily signed key documents, actions that undermined his defense of ignorance.
The sentence imposed by the lower court a fine of Sh1.62 million or a default of six years in prison was deemed lawful and proportionate. The judge held that there were no compelling reasons to depart from statutory sentencing requirements and concluded that the trial was fair and the verdict sound.
The appeal was dismissed, and both the conviction and sentence were upheld.
