T. L. vs Republic (HC Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 1990) [1991] TZHC 2411 (21 August 1991)

___ ,. _____ _ ?-10 ,. .. ,--.,11··1·~ r::"·u· ,, ''o 2 nt t:1.:: t_.,,.i,:-.17 t 1 _,, J 0 oin-Uy con·dct;;: • .. ..... J.~~¥ -..-l "' J..i:.-'..J .. )'.;'-..· ◄ J.( • - ~ ·together with two other accused persons who have not so far appealed. The three ·accused prsons were convicted by the District Court of Dodoma for two counts; a) burglary and '5) stealing. There was evidenct: that the house of one teacher called Stella David, P\·J,3, was bur3lec.l during the ni 6 ht of 2nd July, ·'19a9, while she was on lenl{e at Dodoma• Someone who was doinG the house-warming for her informed her of the bu.r,;la.ry and theft at her house i_n the villa.;e of Lwsala, Dodo1-;m Rural _District, Several i teL1s of property were stolen. The toto.l value of the property stolen stood at Shs,51,450/=, Tho complainclnt suspected the third accused at the trial Zfia...--iii · Se"l,er:.any, and hei< suspicion paid off• Investigations revealed severe..l of the:-stolen items in the possession of this accuseI person • . These included a kitenge cloth, a pink blouse and one GOvm. These were covered with dry i:1aize stru.ks I This accused ,then ncmtioncd accuscid Ho .1 r.nd accused No.2 jJ,he appellangas those with whon he 00111:u.tted the offcnc0s.., He alsQ vo11t'IJ!1tee,re_g. to len.d the search.party to the place where t:1.:.: ot1cr . I stolen i tewJS · were hic1den• The search thereaed ·to the discovery of a box containing sor.:ie of those stolen ite11a 1 Then 1 accused lo.3, who had run avtay, was arrested and disclosed that he had sold a mattress to one fersJn of Majengo area, Dodona, .,./2

: 2 After sometime, the appellant was arr-ested ith a atolan bed-sheet which was identified by the complainan:il as one of those itews stole f;on her house. This is Exhibit P2. There was no explanation as to where the appellan-t got that bed shbet fron or as to how he en.me to possess it. !n his defence, the appellant clained that the bed-sheet Wc?J3 planted on hin by the cor:iplaint•s search-party. The evidence on record is overwhelningly establishinc the fact that the appell.nt is a paxty to the offences. Not only becuuse he W8B t1ent,ioned by accused No.1 as the one with whom he cowr:rl.tted the offences together with. accwiea· l~o 1 3 but be~~~use he was also actually found w:i.th a ced-mieot which was :._:;ropel;'ly idcmtltied o.e oiae of those i tens, stol.e!S· from the house of the conplainant after that house had been bur6 lec1.. , The trial court properly convicted the appellant for the offences jointly cornnitted with two other accused persons who ave not appealed. The sentences iraposea a6 inst the appellant are proper, taking into consideration that the value of the items stolen stood at shs.51,450/=. Learned State Attorney-was all out in support of the convictions, holding the prosecution witnesses to be truthful. This appeal has to fail as the Grounds of appeal relied I upon by the 2.ppcll2.nt are devoid of 1aeri t • The appeal is accordinly disraissed in its· entirety. n jfl c:-__ . _ '1-t.c .,. {R::J. L - RUIMi!BlKA) JUDGE DODOMA -- Delivered· in chanbers this 21st day of August, 1991, crid in the presence of the a;;pellt'.lnt and the Stc.te Attorney, Mr. Kifunda. · _flJ{I t:, (R .JL.-··mnimerBIICA) DODOl'!Ul J;tJDGE 21/8/91 ••• /3

Court: :OODQl\U.

• r• ,_. i1/8/9t j i The appellc.nt is inforraGd of his ri-:;hts of furth0r ap::ieal to th~ _C~mrt of Appeal, according to the provisions of· the law, . \ n l,n • J f ~~" -

• 0 '-IU"-IBIKA) (R.J .t . .tt ~ l JUDGE t.• .'-..,- • •