africa.law — Free African Legal Information

Judgment

S.. . 5•S_ 55 fl' .. 'Z\ i.:.: HIGh COUii 1 OF r$Yi • . ii HBEYA . S laoid . . . i.. TITG . Cl' 2 CRI1LJL P2P1 L 0 i6c F i3 Orre1. Criminal (Case ic 5 of t, e Diric ert of iibozi )isrict at bo7l . h ZA1.0I Lsc. DICJTRICT 1xG:uw.:L':

JOLI 2 L. D s/o NDS0, I . . . S Versus S 5 rp1 ...:.Jhi,ic 3Io1n):c:T. .i.. •.• 5' ! J. QJ?. ii ........ Tlë two apèl'1.aits, namely, one Jfl I S/P MTYA:. and o.e. .JONAD J/O. NDiSI, whoni S I shall hremnafteP i'efer to as the. 1st and. 2ac1. Dü'Qh1ant, respec- ively, were Joinuly. and. conoonv.icted.before 9 lower court of the offence of robbery with vi1ence: along with five... 9:ber accused persons. T-r wr.thiOn seit:-ied.to éven.years jail each, and were orderecito compensate the complainant, :d3e LI.:)OH s/o HO !i,:(P.t'.2)., for the rrecov.ered goods that had been proved to have been stolen in the course of the robe.ry. The two have noti aoa1ed :bb this .cout against both snoh conviction, sertendë and order- 'for 'bompensàtion. and -t`ieir Apppals have been consolidated. r wore the .oriCiial 3rd and 6th accused-s, respectively.. Tic cbr',-xioii complaint sas± t he judgOmont of 'thô lowar.court centre on the issuO of id6ntjfibtion 4 It i the guethent Of tho:t:jo aoeflanbs hat fhe wer not tl1 iiIentif led a bandit.s wio.. had crobbed fthc complainant on the day of tfi incident and none of thciu w..found with any Of the complEtinantc stolen goods. Jo the ap.oai ci'ic up for nearir ss ii raltelLke, 1ca. ad ito 'ttorney dcclinod. to n1oor the conviction of chic to aD2o'lants, and tneir consequential sentences of imprisonment on ground thdt tho had not been adequately 'identified because the conditions for their identifiOation was not favoirable. For the offence was committed at nigirt c 'i the robbers are, said to have had torches qhich they used toflash the coi lc±ient and - his wives in their eyes as they robbed thcn. Yet it iO su6h torch iifrt thnt was said to have enabled both the dmplainant (PTi 2). and hi'threo wives, the P.I.3, one LIET cl/o SDIKI aild -the F.f.4, one d/o PLAY3SON, to identify the bancli -te, incling the apellñts. That boiic; the pc5sition, the learned State .\ttornay could not accopt the claim by such prosecution • . S .

poq4tww00 uoo(1 oivt o poo 0 ixoqqOx pLr 1zuc, ot1q. tot @UITq. ou,nr tiTriI.p.S oc:dc..0iq UOtWO.tJt20JE 0tq. sproeJ soqL! Ot JO Lt.L O1O1 OLfl. Lt?t. JJO.S pOSJI2O110 ,'J JD OJOW. ttOOc1 0AI3U O OW O. IJTJUOS oop t 4xOAOI1G . • St?TocIO oiq. toTIcIWt JUnJ ttt pOIOTTl2q. iton. s l .i3t 0L14 SOAU1 .OMOr Stt JO q p . OJOqOLxOo .t1nJ IC: om oqq Jo OOLIOpTAO Oti qiiop ou si . posnoo uttto OT.q. jo qoo(oox .tt prcs so uTtTXC utiVnq not.Ti& or:s s utnç1 wo otr. qo popo fcp. oi. t:r Jo1r3o r)Ot OtLXsUO5J0(I ot 2:o Z0(q OAI.t 0. qiO •poprtod oo" sq.ut:o( osrq Jo ouou 'I.oxddV . T3 op .zio1. oq. o2uuip ptoi 01. SO.iOJIOV. p05019 OAIUflOM SO O2flW !oii. qLfl0p 01 -JtiJ pLtt(1 U000L OOt 'SU1J J Ot4 S'AtM O 1 1. stt pert? OrU2Lt3 L1 TQ9 )114 SOtJ tOt JO ttOX )A.. 01 pOqtI.SOD S"A L0tTM .t3t1 TT9JQ tOJ'S I 1t! 00tJ Jt01 4 t -t 1JSV1J 'TI.)( strI1 -)dcl1 2 IO 10 tOtW0TJt mIt .adojc a 1 aOj st O1qtOtOO qxaoAoJ popiiLoIi orj o pod00012 0(1 'ootxodxo ptro osuos :owtuoo 'q.ou[Lo J L' 51 t I uons SLX13l1rrt ozi I- s aq. q. qr1 roJtro &tttoC tT'OC pOti 01 11 51. 0 oC ' JO OLO S M OJI If J Tj5j T I 7i1LL 0 T U 1 odda JO 9'1 0 It'll. 1,3 'twtXQ Ut 0S112 P1S I SO 01't'lI'0JO Ott' L't SflUJ

. . 'SpOO UOtO —l2TdWOO OttO JO 't' 'OUflOJ S 1LOC1I Otfl JO .&U13 3I[ 101 t i0 pOtJJ'UO JOA'l st opo tooij -qttopt ootIOd JIotmxOJtIr. 'sqtpuq etjq. pOtJtqJXo -p'c e1(0LT 0' -, L pourt o 7'f puo cj li 0P'. t SOAtM 014 SI tLI a Ou, T 051 0q 'i d uoutdwoo qà:. tji -i. ttoJo. t.ons ,c PT' tfl I 0011J oq. wt L. p01.TSCIJ so::. ttOi1:L UOtM SottOjo. 'ltI 'p1.10 powJP OJOV .1Otfl. dOus s t10trç'ndwoo at. Ot S.TpI9IQ [t(j. U3tt•1 pttfl0J towwoo os'[o i i poq.sisax ot Ji WU ttodn OOJO JO OSfl JO -,)tln ttOtM woopoq Sit: oxct O0jOJ O paxopxo S'OM .tt0t!tOtIir00 ot. UOOS os o 1 .spooi? ot oXOJOq £iotpowuit ptmo,10 UOWW09 O51,U oi: :-: • wOJJoJott. U01Os qoO SpOO dots 1J0AOS p1.10 'Stpt!I3q L'q OUt I2O)[OJCL 0SUO1. L1 ttt8Mp SItT O. q.uoo 1M:f. (.!id) 11Zt2P3IdW00 ot. jo dotis oU. 9'J6I JVJ?flUOf JO p I491 JO q.tjJttt Ot.UT Ptmoj.53 L1l1OQ J80[ O[. 0.IOJ0Cj 'p3flpp0 Sra oouopXo ot. p. upi000ij
. . • . .. . . .. 'SOOdSUS 0t JO UOtWOiJt.t0pt 0I.ftJOj qno 'pOtJXOO apJt?d uototyrtopt Sotlod 1t10 SOM JOtI 01 '. JO OSJUOO OTYfl 171 iI9UtO1dU00 01.jI OJJ UOIO''$ 1700(1 0/ o ptCs spoo eqq JO iczcm ItM pttrtoj S Stt0Eiec1da ?tOJO OUOtt 'pOUJO 0tS fl.

peppij .1JOOJ St10 1:1OddO 0t1. .iVJtttopt O.', OIOO OJOM i0tF. LOtp. sessouq -t ,'

4* k I For the above reasons, as also conceded by the learacd 3tato ttornoy I. cannot but allow these appeals, •quas11m;, the lower court's co:iviction and sentence together with the order for compensation as passed upoa the apc- liants, with an order that each of the two appellants, nasoly one J0FJ s/o IikFYI and one LdD0ihU)3/0 i'IDASI, should he released fortinqith unless lawfully held for another cause. Delivered in Chriijors, at PTheya this 17th day of Novoiiber 1990., in the presence of hiss liwaiteleke, learned State Attorncy, - RJkA 17/l1/) 0 (

Judgment

S.. . 5•S_ 55 fl' .. 'Z\ i.:.: HIGh COUii 1 OF r$Yi • . ii HBEYA . S laoid . . . i.. TITG . Cl' 2 CRI1LJL P2P1 L 0 i6c F i3 Orre1. Criminal (Case ic 5 of t, e Diric ert of iibozi )isrict at bo7l . h ZA1.0I Lsc. DICJTRICT 1xG:uw.:L':

JOLI 2 L. D s/o NDS0, I . . . S Versus S 5 rp1 ...:.Jhi,ic 3Io1n):c:T. .i.. •.• 5' ! J. QJ?. ii ........ Tlë two apèl'1.aits, namely, one Jfl I S/P MTYA:. and o.e. .JONAD J/O. NDiSI, whoni S I shall hremnafteP i'efer to as the. 1st and. 2ac1. Dü'Qh1ant, respec- ively, were Joinuly. and. conoonv.icted.before 9 lower court of the offence of robbery with vi1ence: along with five... 9:ber accused persons. T-r wr.thiOn seit:-ied.to éven.years jail each, and were orderecito compensate the complainant, :d3e LI.:)OH s/o HO !i,:(P.t'.2)., for the rrecov.ered goods that had been proved to have been stolen in the course of the robe.ry. The two have noti aoa1ed :bb this .cout against both snoh conviction, sertendë and order- 'for 'bompensàtion. and -t`ieir Apppals have been consolidated. r wore the .oriCiial 3rd and 6th accused-s, respectively.. Tic cbr',-xioii complaint sas± t he judgOmont of 'thô lowar.court centre on the issuO of id6ntjfibtion 4 It i the guethent Of tho:t:jo aoeflanbs hat fhe wer not tl1 iiIentif led a bandit.s wio.. had crobbed fthc complainant on the day of tfi incident and none of thciu w..found with any Of the complEtinantc stolen goods. Jo the ap.oai ci'ic up for nearir ss ii raltelLke, 1ca. ad ito 'ttorney dcclinod. to n1oor the conviction of chic to aD2o'lants, and tneir consequential sentences of imprisonment on ground thdt tho had not been adequately 'identified because the conditions for their identifiOation was not favoirable. For the offence was committed at nigirt c 'i the robbers are, said to have had torches qhich they used toflash the coi lc±ient and - his wives in their eyes as they robbed thcn. Yet it iO su6h torch iifrt thnt was said to have enabled both the dmplainant (PTi 2). and hi'threo wives, the P.I.3, one LIET cl/o SDIKI aild -the F.f.4, one d/o PLAY3SON, to identify the bancli -te, incling the apellñts. That boiic; the pc5sition, the learned State .\ttornay could not accopt the claim by such prosecution • . S .

. . 'SpOO UOtO —l2TdWOO OttO JO 't' 'OUflOJ S 1LOC1I Otfl JO .&U13 3I[ 101 t i0 pOtJJ'UO JOA'l st opo tooij -qttopt ootIOd JIotmxOJtIr. 'sqtpuq etjq. pOtJtqJXo -p'c e1(0LT 0' -, L pourt o 7'f puo cj li 0P'. t SOAtM 014 SI tLI a Ou, T 051 0q 'i d uoutdwoo qà:. tji -i. ttoJo. t.ons ,c PT' tfl I 0011J oq. wt L. p01.TSCIJ so::. ttOi1:L UOtM SottOjo. 'ltI 'p1.10 powJP OJOV .1Otfl. dOus s t10trç'ndwoo at. Ot S.TpI9IQ [t(j. U3tt•1 pttfl0J towwoo os'[o i i poq.sisax ot Ji WU ttodn OOJO JO OSfl JO -,)tln ttOtM woopoq Sit: oxct O0jOJ O paxopxo S'OM .tt0t!tOtIir00 ot. UOOS os o 1 .spooi? ot oXOJOq £iotpowuit ptmo,10 UOWW09 O51,U oi: :-: • wOJJoJott. U01Os qoO SpOO dots 1J0AOS p1.10 'Stpt!I3q L'q OUt I2O)[OJCL 0SUO1. L1 ttt8Mp SItT O. q.uoo 1M:f. (.!id) 11Zt2P3IdW00 ot. jo dotis oU. 9'J6I JVJ?flUOf JO p I491 JO q.tjJttt Ot.UT Ptmoj.53 L1l1OQ J80[ O[. 0.IOJ0Cj 'p3flpp0 Sra oouopXo ot. p. upi000ij
. . • . .. . . .. 'SOOdSUS 0t JO UOtWOiJt.t0pt 0I.ftJOj qno 'pOtJXOO apJt?d uototyrtopt Sotlod 1t10 SOM JOtI 01 '. JO OSJUOO OTYfl 171 iI9UtO1dU00 01.jI OJJ UOIO''$ 1700(1 0/ o ptCs spoo eqq JO iczcm ItM pttrtoj S Stt0Eiec1da ?tOJO OUOtt 'pOUJO 0tS fl.

peppij .1JOOJ St10 1:1OddO 0t1. .iVJtttopt O.', OIOO OJOM i0tF. LOtp. sessouq -t ,'

John & Another vs Republic (HC Criminal Appeal No 166 of 1987) [1990] TZHC 234 (17 November 1990)

Judgment

Discussion

John & Another vs Republic (HC Criminal Appeal No 166 of 1987) [1990] TZHC 234 (17 November 1990)

Judgment

Discussion