Abdul Kiemi vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 1990) [1991] TZHC 2412 (22 August 1991)

······· ""......,,..,. .. i •• ,. Il'J Ts:SE HIGH COURT OF TAi::fZAN::i:A AT DODOMA CiUtITNAL APP BAL No. 31 OF 1990 (~om thG decision of the District Court of. l'-~pWO..J;)WO. o.t Mpwo..pwa. in :·:-crimin2.J. Cctoo No. 31 of 1990) ' Bofor'Gg ·n.s.: Ml.ay, Esq.,: Sonior District Mc.Jistrr.to. ABDUL KIEMI •• • 0 • o • 0 e • • o O ~ ,. O • 0 t O e O • .3 ~ • Ji.PPELLANT versus THB REPUBLIC t••o•o•o•o•••••o•o•'-•••

JUD· GM ENT PPOiif:DENT (' . ' ' ~~: The a,ppelln.nt WC'.E convicted by the district court c.t Mp\fapwo. of cusing grievous ho.rm r..nd ho WGG sontonccd to elovon months im;risonmGnt. Tho o.poc.l is cinot conviction. When the cho.rgo wc..s rGc.d ovor to tho ppollc.nt ho is rocorc1od 2-8 saying: 11 It n.di-:ri. t. I kickc::d hor with my foot c:.nd sho foll cl0vm i'nd lost onG tooth,"· That wc.s enteroc1. as a, pJ.eo. of 11 guilty 11 to tho chc.rgu. Tho pr0s0cutor t1.Gn nc.rr'."..t.cd the: f2cts which wore to tho offoct thut the o.ppeilnt C!-11 the complninn.nt mot on tho wo.y, ctnd thct tho apellc.nt busGu c:.nd ssaultod tho complQine,nt. Th npp0ll1t admitted those facts. He wc..s n.ccordingly convicted qf co.using grievQus horn. Imrl. tigc.tion, c..ri.d bf or0 sentence wcs po.ssecl, tho a:rpcllwt sto..tod th::i.t ho did not c1o so deliberately. Ho sc.,id th:::.t tho conpl::.in2.nt hcd n.busecl him by c2.lling him o. soclor:'.litc, o.nd tolling hin trot hor f o.th-.:r would sodomize· hi:-.1. It SGCI:JS that tho C,Jpollcnt wc.s wi th(lrc.wing his 02.rlfor plc.:i of guilty. He wc-,s, in other words, Jcnying thc,t ho unlc.wfully cc1.usod grievous ho:rr,1 t,.) thJ cor.1plo.inc.nt. An n.ccusGd p0rson r,10,y c,t ony tL.10 withclro.w 11.io ploc, 0f guilty, -1. ·· ~ ·-_. s.:?n-once is p::ssed. In this c:·..so, whc,t the o.pp0 llr.:nt wc,a ,. in eff i3Ct, s2.yin.:; WC'lJ thCLt 11::: did not wii.,wfully C,'.".,u::;o grievous hC'..I'D c.s 2.llege:c.. H0 wc..s giving r0:J.s0ns which, c.,ccorc.ing to hin, justif iud the: :1.::;s.::-.ul t. In thd c::-.se, thL.· propor proc09-urc woulcl he,v0 buen for thu tricJ. · nc..giotrc,t(; to enter ::,,.. Jl.Jo.. of 11 not ::;uilty';, ¼ ' enc, to proc,.:ed with full tric.l. Vlhcth1.::r th CL)i)vllc.nt nctccJ. unl:.!s_\1fully or not, \·rouh: only bo proved. by ~viLlonco. J

t . r 2 One of the 1;ngredients for the· offence of grievous hm-m under . ,.· .· ·, •. . . seqtion 225 of the Penci Cod0, _;s thct,t the accused person acted unl2.wfuHy • SincG the a.:::,pellant denied in mitigation that he acted .. _:unlo..wfully, he wus in effect withdro.wing his· plea 0£ guilty. The '. ~ : .,: . . tricl ~~gistrn.te erred in. proceeding to sentence tho appellant. The proceedi.."igs before tho district court were, £01' the ree.sons ,· gi vcm .n. m.μli ty. The appeal is allowed ·· Tl~,/-~~ri.viction which is not supported by thG t,' . . .. . ' .. Republic is quashed and th~ sentence is set aside. The appollnnt ho.s already served ho whob sentence, Gnd it is not in thcinter.::st of justice to order a retrial.• ·I do not, therefore, make and orcle~ for ret±iaJ.. .... AT DODOMA ' · 22/s/91· . .,:; W. J. MtJNA . .. : . JUDfE 11r. Alimwilrn, Counsel for the Appellant . ..: •. ... 1: . Mr·. Nr1unr,llrll, Stn.tc,:• At.t.ornoy, for th0 Republic.