Sparrow Baje and Another vs The Republic (C Criminal Appeal No. 177 of 1989; HC Criminal Appeal No. 217 of 217) [1991] TZHC 2179 (12 July 1991)

.. AT TA:OOR.4 --- APP1filiI,AT-W. Jl1RISDTCTJ0l'r (Tgbora RPgistry) (HG) CRP"Ti'°rAL AP"fl"'AL 1'JO. 177 cf 217 OF 1989 0 RJ G J"TIT .AL CRTI"I;T .AL C AS Tli0. 17 2 OF 1988 OF TH'!! DISTRJCT COURT OF KAS'CLU DISTRICT AT KASULU -~ .... ~ • ,•'M Beore; L. M.ASOLJ.A 111sq., R?S;fJ:?-rT/STJOR/DI SlTUCT MAGI STRAT15. -SJ? .ARROW BAJ N 4NOTH11 T1f1l! R?PU BLIC .','' •, I •·'. • ••• ~ , •••• , • • • • • • • • • . • • • APP"fil.rL.ANT (Original Prosecu.tor) • , • • , , ~ • • , • • • • • • • • • • • • • RESPOND1:i'NT . : .. : ' '· (Original ProsPcu.tor ..,. ; '•:1,I J u ,c 'n·-· p I :,Y,. 'D't }?, 'f'T .?; '1',;_, •,--.:,fM•e.; ThP.se appea,ls 1'To. 177 /89 '3na 217 /89 have been c~~;iia''ai;a· 'so' that thPy arP. consi.dr->rP.a ana aetP.rrnjnea collio.ctively si11.CP they spring fro'!!' the S'.:t11JP Cri rn:i nal CasP 11 ro ~ 172/88 aeci a ea by the Dtstrict Gou.rt, KasL1lu. The 1st AppelJant (1st AccusP.a) one Sparrow Baje ana the 2nc Appellant ( 2nd \ccu.sP.d), one Ayu b Sabi.bi: were . jo.intly har,ged . .. . - ' . . . ·· ' . . ... with the Offence of stA31:i.ng by servant c/s _271 and 265 of the Penal Cod'e. They vver conviotn.d:arid 08Ch shtfmc""a ·to :a pr:i son· te.rm of 5 years ip-rlsonri1nt~ _Aggri.ev.Pd :y th °CP,ciBion pf th~ Dis,:trict Court·, - hey have ap_pealed to thi.s Gou.rt :against _bo:t.h: .;i,,.,., . .,-:-. :. · .... -... . . · .• ' .\ ,· .• convicti.ons and sentP.nces • .Accoding to the evidpnce j thP. 2nd Appellant-. ( 2;;a· Accu~;a) one Ayub Sabi bi was an ernplOYP.P of the Kasulu District Gour.oil with the ti. tle of Building Officer. He was cone t:lrnP.d with thf" supervision of a varj_P.ty of work undAr the D:l.str:ict gineerii onP. Damian yura. '(PW. l) ana one : 11 ':U!lbohP.la Filbio.rt (P.W. 2). Tn his capa<dty as the Builcinf Officer, the 2nr ppr.-11::mt, on Ayub Sabi.bi, w9s· 1mp0wred to lof'}k for la.bourArs,. engq,p.:r.>. thPm ~na thi=in prr.>pare n monthly . . ' . . / ' > ' . ' . ' p3,yroll showinp thr.> list of 1-'3.00U!'f>rS,:Who vvouJ.d W0r.l{ in- 6rl0 2/.

,

• 2 - particular month. he payroll would b signqd by a fcrernan a.,pointPd by thP 2nd Appellaht htmself to supervise any su¢h piece. of work. The payro11 would prO(H!duralJy be sjg:nr--a by th!'! foreman '!.n.a the 2nd Appellant.· Thrs cul,Y si gt') P0 payr6li would thm1. bP rIDJ. tte a to thP C!ish off:i c9 for purpose bf getting pr0parPd a sin.gle paymPnt v ouc hr->r bari ng the nP,C e ssqry particulars and thr-m sign r>d by th 2nd AppPllant. ·. Such s1 gned paymr-mt vouoher ac coropanyj ng thG duly signed pay-roll would then <t:uJ.roinate in the issu~ ·of a oheque which would be cashed ana the proCGt:>ds paid to th8 labourers. Between the per:i.od of 13/10/86 and. 10/11/88 a total sum of Shs.102,471/75 was paid. to labourers. On checking, it was di scovP.rr:d that the payment voucher No. 23/11; payment voucher 'f\To. 24/11 for Shs.26,606/30; pg,yment vollcher 1'1o. 4,/10 for Shs.28,539/45; payment voucher r--ro. 47/10 for Shs.27,318/50 with th0 r"'leV9_nt pay-rolJ.s ana attaoh,:,d to thnr!i sign8d by the· 2nd Appella.nt w0.r9 falsA in that no work of. any kjnd had eVPr b"GI'.l. don0. and t'13.t thP mony was thPr0.fore stol(m. Thr- 2nd Appll!3.nt totqlly anj.r..d sj gning any of thn Pxhibit8o PaymAnt Vou.chPrs '3.na payrolls. ThP 1st Appellant ,st .Accuspd), one Sparrow Baje, -ch.n thP, C!3.shjPr adrrjttC>a pr(.)pg,rjng thP, xl-)ib:i tP.d Pay:rnl'.:!-nt Vouchers o:ri th strP.11gth or -bhra aut12ori ty of thn 2nd Appel 1 ;mt 1 s sjgnature. The 1st Appellant admi tt"'a paying the JT1oney to th labour0r whorr: only thP. 2nd.Appellant knew and that hA did so, in th presencP. of th"? 2nd App eli,smt. ... The lr.;arned State Attorney, Itrr •. Bilalo unresRrvedly supported convictions of both Appellants. Having oare-fully gonP, through the evidence as adducd bP,fore the• Lower Court,· I am una.bl P. to agree with the 1 earned StatP Attorney, that th~ conviction against thP 1st ·Appellant (1st Accus0a), onP Sparrow Baje, was well-foun.d.ed. The 1st Appellant was obliged to p n=nare thn payment vo uch9rs on b0.ing s1.tisfj_1;d that tht:? 2nd Appellant, whose signature hP. knw, · had duly signt=>d on thP pay-roll~ Th~ signatories of the oheques sjgna on thA cheques on· being satisfi Pd that the 2na App0llant had si gnPd on all thA pay-roll 9 3 n& payn,r-nt vouchrs. . . . . . . . 3/,,

., ;,. 3 Th,e 1st Appell mt paid th~ ·:monf'!y to th0 .labo-u.rers as -confim.-Pd by th"' 2nd Appellmt ,. who undou b-t.-,dly knew, the labourers, ·hr-: h3.d himsGlf 0.nggged G As to the 2nd AppelL1nt 1 ( 2nd Accl:l-sP-d), ther was overwhr-lming eVidrnc0 to prov0. thP fact that it W:3.S th~ 2nd Appellant 9 hi.:m iloner ' •·4-, ( who h.'3,d signrd thr- -1:;r.ndr,rc::d PXhibi tso :rhn evid0nce of Oll"' Tumian ( P 'ff . /" ' ' - Fyura • ,.. , 1), on0 h:im oonela :F'ilbr:r-c (PWo 2) on0. Iladqla. t'as:1nj.:1 • I (P.W. 8) a,n .. ~ othr.-rs co:a.:f:1.rmr-d -L.h.0 1st Api::i<::1r-mt' s tr-stirnony thqt thP r>Xh:i.bi t0d v:i.ym,..,nt VO L.:;hP:r'S :mfl P'.::!YTOlJ."s h:iq br.n1"1 sign0c by th" 2nr Aponllmto ·rhPr0 is th,·· r-7j_r·,-nc:.r> of O:r7P W;i.lljgm Rubw9 (PoW. 12) q C.!ishinr 1.n th,, lT1vin.:nsl F:-iH,<.. :f C:rri:r,,n;n; Ksulu Br.9nch. p.'7. 12 ! f!,'J.VI"> 0-w-i {ir,r.cn br,forro ti-1,c, Lc• 1 ;;.-·,:r- Co Lrt ,.na tolcl tti.r-- Court tht h_,.-, hq_d Csnd th~ ChPqUns xjtit P. 5, - 6 na P. 7 qpd hd giVP thn proc9Jos to th"' 2-rn 1-ppeJ.'i 1nt w•·,o :n1.d si ,gi;,0n i:n his prr->snnc(.). Ori tryc. t'or,=,,o:orin ,grou: 11 rlss T '.,','OUL.d. :'!1.1.bw th,:, "JPf'l?.'.11 jr, rnsp 0 ct of thn 1st Ap_pr.>: 1 _ 13.nt, on n Spa:crow B1. jG '1nd dj smi ss th1.t of th(.'\ 2:n a Appellqnt, onn Ayub Sibjti. I E0for" J conclud0 1 J wo:11d oosnrv,., th:1t thr- AppG17.:mts h::i..d br..nr1 I wrongly ch,1rgr-cl unc'er- th.r. prov is, one of ·s,,,ctjon .271 _,ma 65 of t!1r, Penal Cod",. Th'"? Appell :i;:1 ts h:iving bnr:n 1rmployr f:'9 of thr. Distr:i. ct Counnil, K3..sulu w}1jch is•- :3pncifird Au-horityj th0:y sh 0 ,,(;Ea . h appropriq_tcly h:i.->e: 'occm chg_rgca with th0 Offr,ncc of stoi.ing by :1 I p Arson rJLploy rd in thr publ:1.c ~ s0rvic ~ b/ s 265 me 270 of th0. Prn 11 Ooae. _TTowr:ivrr, J 1Jil not ·1.t 111. surr, if th..-, provisions of srec:t:ion 270 ,CJnc! 265 of th,... F"n 1.l Co fJ r is thr. c9rr. 0 ct on. Th,..-r w·1s :no atrr.ct th..-,ft of thr Cour,dl's rnonr.y. Jt w11s ar1wn fro.m t1.1,.., ll1t-;rn9l J3':l.nk of. Corr'rnr.i re E'! ll 1{ 1.sul u r.n prns0nt'1tirn of oh r..qu.0s whj ch purportnd to b"' -Vqli<L Tf thn J3i.ux Kq,sulll h-9d :knoimi. of th ungi:m.uinr--nr.,ss of I• ,. th0 prr,e,-,ntr.-a Gl-1,.,quns_. it wou1a hqvo rnfrr0a thP :mr.:ittnr to th,-,, Cou.t'c:il; counsr.iq_uP11.tly, p9..yJTJr:11t stopor., 1 ,a. · Tt i.s my siPCP.rP vjow, t1'1nrrrforr.,, th1.t th0 off,.,-,:ncn co.,...,...,:ittnd' w·::ts th,1t of obt·:d:nF-; goocls by frus" prAt,.,ns0s. 1 1 t".lorr--forP 9 coJ"lvic th0 2nd Appell';_nt of th0 offrmcn of obt7.ine g:::•ods by fqlsn pr 0 trn'..'"'S c/s 302 of th.n. Pen?.1 Cod8. As T s1:ia bP-fore, J dj_s:iss th('> 1,ppr-ql. in rspec-t of th 0 2nd Appell mt ( 2na Accus0a), on--~ ·, ( ) \ I, ·, ' t / ...... " . 4/. _,- /

• 4 - As to t110. 1st Appel,a11t. (1st Accus.--d) one Spg_rtow Baje, J quash conviction 1.g.:-drist h:i:m gnf! snt asidr:i t.h/:l s(>ntncn of 5 ygrs :i mprl sontnent. The .1st App811 'lnt b"' r0l~-:ts"'a forth.w::i th uriloss o-thPrw:i S(> lawf ull.Y hAld j n Custody.· . . A. G. GM_.KOROSSO, JUDG~ •