africa.law — Free African Legal Information

Judgment

I SEKUL~ J.. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ThNZr1.Nii\ AT lVMi,NZh (OC) CIVIL JU:'t.'EA!, N0.218/89 {Frum th~ 1~~ision of Buniu Distriet c~~urt c:1t BuMa in Civil A;)peal No. 7 .:)f 1988. Befori; A. Magafu (Mrs) District Nagistrate) CHIKURUGU Kr.BOCHE •••••••••• C, •• • • • • • • • • ,0 • ·• •• , ••• JUOGlVIE;NT . The r,;;spondent i•Jufungo i•1uyembe succ.::ssfully sue1 the up;>ellant Chikurugu Kc.ibuche in th1c: Nansirn;; t'rimary C(.)urt f0r riam.3gcs f:'.)r 3·:lul t,:;ry. An1 th-c:: a .pr..:ll ant WuS then :)r-ierc:d t) pc.1y five heads uf · c,ittl e .:is r-1,3mz.·.y-.::s. The r:;;s;.,01rlnt had in this suit cl .ciimed st=ven heads .:>f c.1tt1-2. rhs:: appellant unsuceessfully ar)pe3led tc thf.::: District Court of Bun1.J. District .• - Thi; award was h,:::iwevs:r re,iuce1 t() fvur h1::d1s. of c.:1ttl,.;: inst<:!~~1 .:.,f the:: .five hea1s of cattl,/ the trial C::.>Urt h,,1 ..1w-iti<=1. The C,:;.s~~ :for th-2 rt'SO:'.)n,jent at ·th. trial Wi.!S that .)0 the 17th ~ . . . of J.:rnu:iry 1987 at abJut 3 p.m. his wife ani his nepht:'W went tJ W:)rk in a cotton shc:imba. He hims'elf wen.t out tu look f,)r S,.)me ·fish.. He~· return~~d home at about s· '·p.m. ani founi his wif~~ as well .:.s the n2Jh ,w

h::11Lr2tu:t;'ned fr.:.;m th~ shamba. He also ther.:fure decii,d tu g:::> tJ the: 
cotton sham.~u where his fami1y were working. H,~ went anrl L,und his n,:·:,h,.w 
working in th2 shamba, the· wife was however n•.)t arJun1. nn-i u;un 
' . 
inquiry, his nephew tolr\ him that she had gon-2 to he:1 p h~rseJ. f as she,; 
had s0m...: s t,)ffiGlCh trvubl e. 
It w.:.,ul1 uppear she···took tim.:: to return ani ulti~-:.:itely th2 n,.:ph\;.;w 
sh;;,we1 th,.: r'c.:spon1ent the· dir1::ction She had taken while g0i!'}g to e~se 
ht::rs..;lf in-:\::h-;;: bush. The res:,0nient then_fvllJwei t,he .-1irE..:.c_~ion 
injti.e2:t2d cn:i h~ founi the cF))dlJnt s'itting t:)g,~tht:•r unier a tr~e ch-::t-tit1<:J• 
Anri th::lt wh-.::n the::y ·sa~ him, th•::y t00k to their heels. Th•2 res,Jonierit 
pursu~::i th-.:: 2~:;pcllant wnile calling for help. rle c~ught up with him nnd 
started be.:::iting him. 0n-e·· 03u1i arrivtd · at the scene trn.i intervened 
by a1vising the n.::sp,:,,ndent to take qther ap_prvpri-3.te steps..:~han to 
c_0ntinue be:eiting the appel'l unt. 
D.audi f',~tr0, wh-.im the resr.)nient C3llE>i as his witn;_-:,ss suiJp.:.>r-te:d 
this st.:;ry. Ml1 ;S:.) 1i·i the r12s:,,mient 
I 
s wife.

.. > 
" t 
( 
2 
rh.s: a,JpE::llant of c:)urse ienie1. this stvry. Both parties_ a,);)eored 
in ;;,2rs~,n c:t the h1:aring of. this _,:rnpeah, 
a , . 
rh..:.: a:Jpdlan_t·, i,njlcngth mem:.)riln1um o.f ap;J~al has r:.1ise1 3 number 
ot 9r·:n.1n-:1 s. 
I hc\r9 c,;•ns·i,ierei th.;: groun1s ·.)f aop-eal rdise1 _by. ~he 3i))ellant 1.:s 
well .3S th, .. o·ral submissi:.:l_ns· the.· μarti,:as mp·je at the hectri.n,:. of thi.~ 
appeal ~":-.-1 I _3m 0f th12 0pihi0n that the current r~l:cisi:ms uf t):10 twu 
lower Courts W<=re .. ~n the eviience a11ucc:1 pr·)[k:r ani well f:)Uni-21. 
On<-' of the mc:.in gr0un1s uf af.)~eal was th,:i t the suit w;:.is but 
a put up affoir _vn the part of .,:~he r1::S.J?01ent to settle sc:;res with 
him .<.1s h2 had in the passe1 ·occu.s~1 him (res9-.:)n•:hrnt) of cattl..,; th-c::ft :=:nd 
.!-' 
-~ha't./a8;211Q·nt's unc::le killd a rel..1tive of the reS~).:m1ent but .3lSJ this 
was ir. th~ p~ssed • 
:I'h1c: r.::::s)oni~nt denie1 tu. ·hiive been accusei of eattle· theft. He r:1i::l 
. 
· however admit .. t:h.:i.t it is true un uncle 0f the appellant kill-=1· ·3 r,.:lativ;.: 
. •.)'f his but this. was Wu!t. back in 1975 t that is, fifteen years ago, 
~ . . . . 
nn1 th2t·th~ peri::!nts an1 oth~r more close-·relatives of the all·."ged killer 
are in th~; villag,~. The res 
1 
)olllio=nt ·th~r.~fore argudri th.:1t if th2r~ Wc.~s 
a· qu-=~tion '.)f s1:.::tling_ scu·re-$ with reg-:ir1 to-_that .inci1ent-, _why pick., 
... on the u[)i?,:::llcint an-i leave the closest rela:tives e>f the ali~ge-1. killr:,r. 
I am inclin12d ,to agree with th~ rc:sp-?nient on this issu2 J.111 ;:ibc;v-: 
·all; all th<:: incirl.~~ts .~hich the appell;rnt claimer\ were the m.Jtiv'G b·,_hin·'. 
this suit,' hc1ppene1 a long time ago. 
Th(;.)ri:: w:-:s ::il so ere:Iibl-: 2vi 11:nce uni ·which was acc~,ptei by bJth c,~ur'cs 
bel )W su;_;porti ng the r1::s::)ot1ien't Is· Ci..iS'<=. 
Th,,:: .:1::!?4lant also qut.!stions· the marriagt= be-tween th-2 respon1E:r.t 
an1 his wife in his m~moranrfuil of· app-~al.. This issue was nev.:r r:.1is2d 
. \ 
at th~ trial '::mi th,:? appellant has not raise-1 any .substantial, gt"ounjs 
.. that C.Juld t-:::mpt this Court ,an·1 ;at_._this stag~ tu put this marr:i..:i\Je iritc 
t···4u~stion. · 
Lastly, though· it is true that the r;.::s,Jon1ent max h::ive b•~<:!n tt:i-2d 
an1 ccmvict"'d f.::>r the assault he m~te<l in tht:: rtS()uni.ent ::m the '- 
material day, that _in my vL::w w;.;ul1. not have servei as a bar t.:> the 
,· / 
civil S\lit the rcsp_on:i.ent. institutei :3gainst the -responient for 1im~g0s 
' 
· .for ,3du1 t..::ry. These .were in my vt2w separate issues. The res~;on1~nt 
• • • • I 
app·::ars to have assaul te1 appeH.uat .,:is ·a result of prov0c<.1ti0n· up0n\ fin.--1ing • 
. . . . . ; '. . . 
h,~m with his wife i:n. ~i~_umstanccs _that:-iresi·stibly sugg<=stei that,_ t~cir 
a°"ssvei!'tiorf'in. th~t bu~h was' adulte+ous. ·• ;~_ + · :--' ·;. · .J.,. .t. 
.. . . ·- ., . . . - ... 
So if the reS[)uni en.~ 'wa·s charge1: with. assaulting the <lj)?t?lla nt, the· 
,I •• 
.eharge wus b,.>un'.i to s"ti:ck, ·tor. pr~v.:,;cat~on in. law is no iefence fJr the::. 
c~arge·ot assnu.1t. 
,L.

.r .• ,•; 
.,,, ... 
. ._ .. 
This ther;:.;fr>re ·n{e3ns a :cJhvic·tL.m for .sudi.· !3n Jf.:f:~i'lr::~; w.:,0.1,~ _.-p~t 
nc:c1.:ss2rily vitic1te a suit ,:;,f th-2 kin-~ the res;>oniLilt ins-b.,tutl:de • 
I am tht.:r~for-e scitfs:fie1 that ·th.ts -a·pμc>.:ii- i:s ,v,r,~.tho~t;- rn.,;:ri:t c:i-.,:1 i 
1 
c 
. . ' : ~ . . . -~ . , 
is h.:..r~by _ 1ismisse1 ♦ w·:ith costs·. 
•. : "J. ';, 
'f' ' • ~ • • 
· '.'· 
'1 
,.. 
\ . 
-.-•· 
\ .. 
.. _ r·: W,,.· H~~•.:,f;:KlJLE~. 
;}., . · · · JU'l)Gt ' ,:A. ; · 
... 
.. ' 
.. } . 
. :_• 
'! 101:12/9Q. 
JUDGE'-': :· ;-- · 
--- 
,) 
. .. . 
; . .l 
. : 
•' 
. · .. 
. . 
. ' 
' N ~• • 
~ 7'.'·;'(; ... ~ ... ~::- 
' . 
··::-:,' ..... 
.... : 
.J t.l • 
f 
..... 
.... 
.\.; 
·; 
'. t .. 
•· . 
I t

Judgment

h::11Lr2tu:t;'ned fr.:.;m th~ shamba. He also ther.:fure decii,d tu g:::> tJ the: 
cotton sham.~u where his fami1y were working. H,~ went anrl L,und his n,:·:,h,.w 
working in th2 shamba, the· wife was however n•.)t arJun1. nn-i u;un 
' . 
inquiry, his nephew tolr\ him that she had gon-2 to he:1 p h~rseJ. f as she,; 
had s0m...: s t,)ffiGlCh trvubl e. 
It w.:.,ul1 uppear she···took tim.:: to return ani ulti~-:.:itely th2 n,.:ph\;.;w 
sh;;,we1 th,.: r'c.:spon1ent the· dir1::ction She had taken while g0i!'}g to e~se 
ht::rs..;lf in-:\::h-;;: bush. The res:,0nient then_fvllJwei t,he .-1irE..:.c_~ion 
injti.e2:t2d cn:i h~ founi the cF))dlJnt s'itting t:)g,~tht:•r unier a tr~e ch-::t-tit1<:J• 
Anri th::lt wh-.::n the::y ·sa~ him, th•::y t00k to their heels. Th•2 res,Jonierit 
pursu~::i th-.:: 2~:;pcllant wnile calling for help. rle c~ught up with him nnd 
started be.:::iting him. 0n-e·· 03u1i arrivtd · at the scene trn.i intervened 
by a1vising the n.::sp,:,,ndent to take qther ap_prvpri-3.te steps..:~han to 
c_0ntinue be:eiting the appel'l unt. 
D.audi f',~tr0, wh-.im the resr.)nient C3llE>i as his witn;_-:,ss suiJp.:.>r-te:d 
this st.:;ry. Ml1 ;S:.) 1i·i the r12s:,,mient 
I 
s wife.

.. > 
" t 
( 
2 
rh.s: a,JpE::llant of c:)urse ienie1. this stvry. Both parties_ a,);)eored 
in ;;,2rs~,n c:t the h1:aring of. this _,:rnpeah, 
a , . 
rh..:.: a:Jpdlan_t·, i,njlcngth mem:.)riln1um o.f ap;J~al has r:.1ise1 3 number 
ot 9r·:n.1n-:1 s. 
I hc\r9 c,;•ns·i,ierei th.;: groun1s ·.)f aop-eal rdise1 _by. ~he 3i))ellant 1.:s 
well .3S th, .. o·ral submissi:.:l_ns· the.· μarti,:as mp·je at the hectri.n,:. of thi.~ 
appeal ~":-.-1 I _3m 0f th12 0pihi0n that the current r~l:cisi:ms uf t):10 twu 
lower Courts W<=re .. ~n the eviience a11ucc:1 pr·)[k:r ani well f:)Uni-21. 
On<-' of the mc:.in gr0un1s uf af.)~eal was th,:i t the suit w;:.is but 
a put up affoir _vn the part of .,:~he r1::S.J?01ent to settle sc:;res with 
him .<.1s h2 had in the passe1 ·occu.s~1 him (res9-.:)n•:hrnt) of cattl..,; th-c::ft :=:nd 
.!-' 
-~ha't./a8;211Q·nt's unc::le killd a rel..1tive of the reS~).:m1ent but .3lSJ this 
was ir. th~ p~ssed • 
:I'h1c: r.::::s)oni~nt denie1 tu. ·hiive been accusei of eattle· theft. He r:1i::l 
. 
· however admit .. t:h.:i.t it is true un uncle 0f the appellant kill-=1· ·3 r,.:lativ;.: 
. •.)'f his but this. was Wu!t. back in 1975 t that is, fifteen years ago, 
~ . . . . 
nn1 th2t·th~ peri::!nts an1 oth~r more close-·relatives of the all·."ged killer 
are in th~; villag,~. The res 
1 
)olllio=nt ·th~r.~fore argudri th.:1t if th2r~ Wc.~s 
a· qu-=~tion '.)f s1:.::tling_ scu·re-$ with reg-:ir1 to-_that .inci1ent-, _why pick., 
... on the u[)i?,:::llcint an-i leave the closest rela:tives e>f the ali~ge-1. killr:,r. 
I am inclin12d ,to agree with th~ rc:sp-?nient on this issu2 J.111 ;:ibc;v-: 
·all; all th<:: incirl.~~ts .~hich the appell;rnt claimer\ were the m.Jtiv'G b·,_hin·'. 
this suit,' hc1ppene1 a long time ago. 
Th(;.)ri:: w:-:s ::il so ere:Iibl-: 2vi 11:nce uni ·which was acc~,ptei by bJth c,~ur'cs 
bel )W su;_;porti ng the r1::s::)ot1ien't Is· Ci..iS'<=. 
Th,,:: .:1::!?4lant also qut.!stions· the marriagt= be-tween th-2 respon1E:r.t 
an1 his wife in his m~moranrfuil of· app-~al.. This issue was nev.:r r:.1is2d 
. \ 
at th~ trial '::mi th,:? appellant has not raise-1 any .substantial, gt"ounjs 
.. that C.Juld t-:::mpt this Court ,an·1 ;at_._this stag~ tu put this marr:i..:i\Je iritc 
t···4u~stion. · 
Lastly, though· it is true that the r;.::s,Jon1ent max h::ive b•~<:!n tt:i-2d 
an1 ccmvict"'d f.::>r the assault he m~te<l in tht:: rtS()uni.ent ::m the '- 
material day, that _in my vL::w w;.;ul1. not have servei as a bar t.:> the 
,· / 
civil S\lit the rcsp_on:i.ent. institutei :3gainst the -responient for 1im~g0s 
' 
· .for ,3du1 t..::ry. These .were in my vt2w separate issues. The res~;on1~nt 
• • • • I 
app·::ars to have assaul te1 appeH.uat .,:is ·a result of prov0c<.1ti0n· up0n\ fin.--1ing • 
. . . . . ; '. . . 
h,~m with his wife i:n. ~i~_umstanccs _that:-iresi·stibly sugg<=stei that,_ t~cir 
a°"ssvei!'tiorf'in. th~t bu~h was' adulte+ous. ·• ;~_ + · :--' ·;. · .J.,. .t. 
.. . . ·- ., . . . - ... 
So if the reS[)uni en.~ 'wa·s charge1: with. assaulting the <lj)?t?lla nt, the· 
,I •• 
.eharge wus b,.>un'.i to s"ti:ck, ·tor. pr~v.:,;cat~on in. law is no iefence fJr the::. 
c~arge·ot assnu.1t. 
,L.

.r .• ,•; 
.,,, ... 
. ._ .. 
This ther;:.;fr>re ·n{e3ns a :cJhvic·tL.m for .sudi.· !3n Jf.:f:~i'lr::~; w.:,0.1,~ _.-p~t 
nc:c1.:ss2rily vitic1te a suit ,:;,f th-2 kin-~ the res;>oniLilt ins-b.,tutl:de • 
I am tht.:r~for-e scitfs:fie1 that ·th.ts -a·pμc>.:ii- i:s ,v,r,~.tho~t;- rn.,;:ri:t c:i-.,:1 i 
1 
c 
. . ' : ~ . . . -~ . , 
is h.:..r~by _ 1ismisse1 ♦ w·:ith costs·. 
•. : "J. ';, 
'f' ' • ~ • • 
· '.'· 
'1 
,.. 
\ . 
-.-•· 
\ .. 
.. _ r·: W,,.· H~~•.:,f;:KlJLE~. 
;}., . · · · JU'l)Gt ' ,:A. ; · 
... 
.. ' 
.. } . 
. :_• 
'! 101:12/9Q. 
JUDGE'-': :· ;-- · 
--- 
,) 
. .. . 
; . .l 
. : 
•' 
. · .. 
. . 
. ' 
' N ~• • 
~ 7'.'·;'(; ... ~ ... ~::- 
' . 
··::-:,' ..... 
.... : 
.J t.l • 
f 
..... 
.... 
.\.; 
·; 
'. t .. 
•· . 
I t

Chikurugu Kabuche vs Mufungo Muyembe (PC Civil Appeal No. 218/89) [1990] TZHC 491 (10 December 1990)

Judgment

Discussion

Chikurugu Kabuche vs Mufungo Muyembe (PC Civil Appeal No. 218/89) [1990] TZHC 491 (10 December 1990)

Judgment

Discussion