This was an appeal against the decision of the Chief Magistrate that convicted and sentenced the appellants of a series of offences arising out of killing wild animals. The appellants also sought to vary the forfeiture order against the rifles and vehicle that were found to have been used in the commission of the offences. The appellants argued that the chief magistrate misconstrued the evidence in holding that the appellants were guilty as principal offenders and for issuing the forfeiture orders. The court noted that appellate courts should vary decisions of trial courts only when a trial court had misdirected itself on a fact or point of law. It was further noted that the Chief Magistrate had the advantages of hearing and assessing the witnesses and made a very careful study of the evidence. However, the trial court failed to establish with any exactitude that the exhibited rifles were the ones that had been used in the commission of the offence, the order of forfeiture in respect of the firearms had to be set aside.