so because even the appellant court is bound by the record of appeal. In the instant appeal, I believe that had the criminal charge been included in the record, the court would have been in a much better position to appreciate the relevancy or materiality of the ~uestion posed to PWl in his re-examination . In accordance with the rules of this court, the appellaht's counsel prepared the appellant's brief of argument dated 23/10/13 and filed on the 25/10/13 . In response, counsel to the respondent filed the respondent's brief dated 4/3/14 and filed on the same date after obtaining leave for extension of time within which to file the respondent's brief vide a motion No/ A/304m/2014 dated 4/3/14 and filed on the same date . The appellant's counsel distilled only one issue for determination, to wit : "whether the trial chief magistrate court was right in upholding the submission of the defence counsel and ruled that PWl should not answer a question put to him in re -examination which was aimed at resolving a contradiction elicited during his cross examination ." _ ~~ t In reaction, the counsel to the respondent posed the following question for determinat ion of this appeal " Whether the trial magistrate erred in law when she upheld the submissions of th e defence counsel and disallowed the question put by the prosecuting counsel to PWl in re-examination on the Bl -1-\ \ ' - I ( ~:,\"'\ "~, ~ - - l