Jalia Mohamed vs Mohamed Nkinzo (PC Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2000) [2000] TZHC 353 (18 April 2000)

1!. IN TET! HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA ATBIJKOBA APPElLATE JURISDICTION (PC) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 4 OF 2000 <J?roin the decision of the District Court of Bukoba District at Bukoba in Criminal Appeal No. 107 of 1999 and original Criminal Case No. 195 of Bukoba - Urban Primary Court. Before: P.Z.Kagali, Esq. SDM) TATTI WMIMTT\ ApPTT Mm tJ4I - ii'-juju-Uj_, J. VERSUS MOHAN.EDNKINZ0 ........ . ... ,.,... 0 ..,,RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T MASANCI, J. This is an appeal arising out of a eripiitaj C0 The appellant Jalla Hohimed, an old lady, and the respondent Moh,iied Nkiuz hd sent each other to Court i* a civil dispute over land 1 The revord is loud and eler that the respondent emerged he winner, There had been several xttepts by the appellant to haasa the respondent over the seine plot. 0.e sh harassment was when this seine lady en.rohed again but was sent to a criminal court - Criminal Qee No 195/9of the Urb.n Court i3ukoba, Somehow, the primary Court lietened to her and aquitted her, of the <riminal trespass case. Whereupos the res.pondeu M(hed Nkinzo appealed to the District Court of Bukoba at Bukoba, And, here, the District Court has reversed the decision,. It .onvicted Jalja Mohrned arr, sente-nmcr tutr to a T1= Df Sbs4 15,%)CL. or 6 months inil Is default. She now appeals to this Court: This appel is, indeed, without substane 4 The eonviaion was sound. and the sentence was not on the high side, If anything it w or the lower side, considering the wy the old lady in harassing the respondent. Th& judgment of the first appellate Court I aM jippotig im not long. It reads:

7 ' ji .. j f , I, J. E. C, MASANC JUDGE

2 .40 J U D G M E N T BlFOflE PZ O KAGALI - 5DM Jalia Mohanied was crgd ]sfre the Urbai Primary Court of Bukoba with Crimiia1 Tesspass c/s 299 of the Penal eode Cap 16, She was fOund not guilty and she wa accor.ingly acquitted. Complainit Mohamed Nkinzo appealed before this Court, It is quite surprising because the l a n d of the Dispute was offered to compl.iiant vide certificate jQ.f ttleN#88. The offe p is for 33 years with effect frorA 101310 Complainant has paid land fees the year 1900 ir']j;'ive i.e., 'rideE .R.V. t427746*of ?/1/99. Again Pespondent's mother Ma W - wao convicted by the seine court Criminal Case No. 42/89 when She tresspassed over the land and got punished. I dontt see the legality of acquitting the Respondent on ground of .ompensat ion over the )xid already proved to belong to appellant by the court of Law Vjde Criminal Case +2/89, She is called upon to show cause why I can not substitute an acquittal for convic t ion , Sgd. P. Z. Kagali Senior Di,srt M'istrate 18/k/2000. Mitigation: Nil. Sentence: Aecused to pay a fine of 1 3. ~ U W= or 6 ji- •rit. . ' - S5d 0 P. Z . Kagali Senior District M,gitrato 18/4/2000" This appeal is dismissed in its atirty. present in person..

• present in person,