Hamisi Mohamedi vs Bakari Hamisi (PC Criminal Appeal No. 2 of 1998) [1998] TZHC 2269 (28 August 1998)

,J j• (PC). CRIM:£1-.,.L APPB.,L NO. ~ O:IT 1998 · . ·. ·~ . . -t~ -thf,i) ciEj.cision c:.i' the District Court ()ft_fON:DOh · District a~ #.J1IDO,• in Cft.mi1ial .• ;.ppe1:iJ,. No •. 2. ~ 1998 ..... priginil·_Criminal Case i 1 Io. 107 of 199? a.·UBI Primary Court) &J\1LSI MOH.-.MillI ••• • ••• • ••••• • . • ••• • ••• • • .a'J'PNI' Vereus J U D G M :G N T In the Primary Court .:..t Haubi, Kondoa, the; respondent was ehari;ed with CriminQl trespuss c/s 85 of the Penal Cede, CD.p.16. After a trinl the said Court found thd the c:.v.:.ilable evidence was insufficient to grow1d a conviction for thE: offence chD.rged. Instead, it founJ tht the evidence established th0 offence of Disobedience of a lawful order c/s 124 of the Penal Code. The respondent was then convict8d of this latter offence and sentenced to a term of imprieonmerit of six(6) months •. Disatisfied. he su- ccessfully appealed to the District Court at Kondo.:.. The District Court found that there, was no evidence to establish e.n offence under s.124 of the Penal Code. This is an appeal against the,• findings and conclusions of the Disti::ict Court., :tr... , • ...... t' I . · .N~~s;lless to say, this was a criminal case in which conviction duld only lie on ptoo of the prosecuti<?n _c8fe beyond reasonable doubt. As'.corectly held by the Distric Court,this onus was~ dischc1rged•.• No evidnce. was produc1,4··· a_i there was ~ iμwJui - th,>.'c was i3sued an,:. di#y:Jl1oy (the~~~ I! 4-llYtJ:iin; the sai<l w- 1 11c;r \iC.S gnly mcmtionec1 in h .Jclgm.:;;!1'i In the ~~QW.'ls·t,mcee s. it ia •bvio·1.1s th&.t no conviqtiQh •·ould l,c., •: the alJ.0c,;vd ~~-rece in -~~11; abs..;;nco · of concre• ovid,mce

tQ p;i;oove it.

' ' ._-,.' .. .\· i .. .,.;· - J I .. l ·1 j 1·- .,. : .... ·--.2 : t• --.- • ~ , In the peti tion 1 of appeal th"'re is cine point ;hie· ·de . ~ r serves special mention i.e. the clleation by the appllant that he unsuccessfully prays:)d to the District Magis.trate for chan,ge of venue. Perhaps, I shold remind the Magistrte that it is not always good to insist on hearing a case when the party ori. parties t6 a CME: have apflied f.or ch.::mge of venue for lack of confidence in the magistrte:. In the words of Mfalila, J- .Ag.J.(as he then was) in -Zabrpn Pan_garc_;lezD., .. v Jociqm Kiw$..e., a.."ld J.nother C.;1..T. Ci.Y,il .•:.r,2eal. no.33/87 a••••••••••The safest thing to do for a judicial officer who finds his j rt:eegzt:j~'c question~ d by litigap.ts or accused persons before him, is to give the benefit of doubt to his irrational accusers and retir8 from the case unless it is quite cle,:ir from the SW'l'nding circumstances and the history of the ca.se th:.t the accus0d is employin::; delaying tactics. Apart from ensuring that justice is se0n to be done, he""' ~ .,, .. - -t"o•- ....... ,.._ ,;,. "'?::•~~ .... saves himself from unnecessa,ry embarassment •.•.•.• l.tn- :: • C• . 7)· .. ~ . . . ... . . .,.... . . In the instapt ci:1.Se,,v.he appallate Distr.ict ragistrat qoul.d ,hp:e easily disqualifieq ,himslf from M~~t4e appeal,;·- /uic-·-;t_nce there is mor·r:: thc:11 0}1e mistrate at Aondq_e, the .appeaj. c.9.ul.d have easily GJten detrmined. by anotJ:ier.1·magistl;_'at_e •. , I ;notce'f: however, that. there · was no failure of', ju13tic.e on. acqunt ;e-t: · :the magistrate's -.refusal to acced3 to the r:eques,t. . .:for ch_ange_ :.o:t: .; • venue. i.s _eali:er state, h evidence at the trial fell short of . . . ...:.:-; s_tablishig he off:pce the respondent was convicted of• It • . ..,_ .:, ••v ...._. --. ,.. • 'f •:, • was therefore inorltable that the appellte .Distrct Magistrate • ,, ,; . " . ' . . .. ,.J.. .......... :.. would det0rmine th~ appeal in the manmir h~ did. Indeed, 7 ven ~- .. ).: J. •f' i•' . .,,, \ • •• •F (; • • '•' • ••••••-•• ••.•• •• •.:7;•,;. i" •• • .!.. _ -l-·- ,., .. _.l..J _ c.::.....!1,;;.::..; ··- ~~·.: · .... l., . _ _ _ .... - 1 ,I _ ,.J'.' .:. .. ,_- -. - '•.·: · 1:-. .. J]Qlii : ,:• , 20/8/9

... ' ·, . .. Coram': s·. B. Lukelelwa, DR A_p:pellant n · d (l?r.esent .a.espon ent"·' C/0: Chalamila .Order: Judgment deliver1;;d in, Ccurt this 28th ;:ugust, 1998. ••• /ask DISTRIC']. R:iGIST&..._q 28/8/98 ' l