Patrick Dominick vs Republic (High Court Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 1999) [1999] TZHC 269 (24 August 1999)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANANIA .fie- AT MBEY.A .APPELLATE j·URISDICTION (MBEYA REGISTRY) HIGH COURT CRIT!IIN.AL .APPEAL. N033 OF 1999 ( Original Criminal case no. 93 of 1999 of Kyela District Court Dictrit at Kyela) :PATRICK DOMINICK •••••••••••.••••• ' •••••••• .APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC ••• ·• ••••• o • & ••• ~ ••• ~ • ~ •••••••• RESPONDENT MYITPOPO t ,J • . The appellant Patrick Dominick was charged and convicted with the offence of stealing from a motor vehicle Registration No.TZJ 3615 which was the bus in which he was working as a bus conductor& He was sentenced to 1 year 9 s imprisonment but is 110w out on bail which was grante~ by thi_s court pending the determination of this appeal. .. 0 His appeal alleged that the purported stolen bag was not given to th~ appellant in person but to PW2 and that since there had were many passengers in the bus they could be the ones who/stolen ito !he learned Mro Boniface (S.A.) did not support the conviction on the s8me- ·basis that the alleeation that the stolen luggage wns packed into the motor vehicle by the appellant was not proved beyond- .reasonable doubt.e .. ./2

2 - There was same room for doubt whether the purported victim om . .·· . of the crime ;Argentina a/o .Adain1i:cf 'orte, bag or "two bags: She •,, • .,. • I alleged that she had' two ba,zs ifhoth of which vvere taken by the. appellant and were kept ·into the: moto;r,".veh_iylets carrier or rake by the appellant. But 9 the app_ellant testified to the contrary ' . , . · .. that he got only orie bag ft)m·:PWl v:hich ;..,as recovered safely at TUkuyu by t~ Police. The complainant PWl was.not in a postion· to .see the, appellant • .. .• i .:. ~ • ., • stenl the bag for she remained behind n Kyela and nobody else .. that saw him steal or temper with /alleged stolen It was not even. stablished beyond rea·sonable doubt that · PWl h2.d two bags at all, the bags themselves were ·,.handled by PQ · PW2 as we 11 . . . . It is also unbelievable that PWl should have kep·t money shsl 70,000/== in a bag which had nothing else in it except. the a . cash amounti, It appears to me-· that the stor~- of ;ost bag with cash ~hs:1.70,000/= was cont,0cted in order to victimize the appellant with a criminal chargje in order to punish him for having left · her behind in Kyela:instead of vva.:j_ ting for her•; so., that she could boarded and have travelled in that bus as Der her plans. I ~ . This appeal has meri t.,.It was wrong to convict him with theft with ·such weak evidence. I acquit him :fr·:()m the conviction of theft from a moii9r vehicle c/ s 265 of the Penal Code: The se!l:"bence of ·· 1 year 1 s imprisonment is aiso· quashed. The appellant is set at •.• /3

...... I 3 liberty for he is innocent. ' ... \ I \ t--~~ E. L. K. MWI.POPO

Coram: E.L.K. Mwipopo, J • .Appellant : Patrick Dominick JUDGE 24.8.99 present in person For Republic: Mr. Mulokozi, Senior State Attorney - present B/C: Urs. Ivlponzi Court: Judgement delivered in the presence of both parties. \ AT i.1/IBEYA -· 1 ELKM/ ATTuP lima •