Singini v R (Criminal Appeal 17 of 1993) [1994] MWHCCiv 30 (25 April 1994)
The evidence did not establish that the appellant dishonestly took property belonging to another; the drugs were still under his control as a pharmacy assistant and not missing. The confession statement was not properly relied upon, and the conviction was not supported by the evidence.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1994] MWHCCiv 30
- Parties
- Appellant: Penjani Singini; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court of Malawi Civil Division
- Jurisdiction
- Malawi
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 17 of 1993
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Theft by Person Employed in Public Service, Confession Statements, Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Penjani Singini
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant committed theft by a person employed in public service under s.278 as read with s.283(1) of the Penal Code
- 2 Whether the confession statement was properly challenged and relied upon
- 3 Whether the conviction and sentence were proper
Ratio Decidendi
The evidence did not establish that the appellant dishonestly took property belonging to another; the drugs were still under his control as a pharmacy assistant and not missing. The confession statement was not properly relied upon, and the conviction was not supported by the evidence.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- conviction quashed
- sentence set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
; Ref. No. 'LL/C11/120/6/_?2 IN THE: HIGH COURT OF MALAWI LILONGWE DISTRICT REGISTRY CRIMINAL ,". PP!"::AL NO. 17 OF 1993 PENJANI SINGINI THE RSPUBLIC From the First Grade ~fagistrate' s court e.t Lilongwe Criminal Case Number 59 of 1992 CORAM: MTMIB09 J. For the Stat~~ 9 U.mbe, State /\dvoc;itc Appollant p;:•;3s0r;t9 ra;):r-esentet'1. by Fachi Law Clerk, Chi lO"lE~O i;inchinc Operat:,r·, i;\tu,~•-:1.uw:,:t.ha JUDG~IBN'l' ,J /; ' r-.• 1 I' 'i'hf..l aµpellar.t was 0.rrt1ignod before tho F:l.,:c: S.,'2J:1c 4.-~\~~~ _;·~, ~:-·:.[..:: 'r court at L:t lor~gv1H 0r1 :-:i cl1rrr·ge of ·th()ft by a. n,~1"son employee in the ::-ublic service cont:rnr·y to s. 278 ns read with s. 283 ( 1) of the Por:al Codo. H0 denied the che..rt:;e but was '10netheless convicted aftc.c· a full tr:i al and was sontencad -co tho ma.ndat:ory -tims of two ycnrs in prison with hi:u'd .labour. He hes appeal0<1 to this court ::irr.o.inst both c:c.•n~riction. and sentence. Th<;::• Etp::;cct:L is cleeu."'l_y 0c_;_ r,:.~3·:tGrs of f.~~ct ~~nd my c~ut,y in co11sitle1~i ~1t; it~ ~:::nerGf"or'e ~ is to :7.~c=-~hcnr 'l:110 ~noe ~ ns -the ;;,h1~ase in uncJers t0od in J.;:,w. I::-1 t'.1is respect I do ~iot thl,:\•; I GB'". do better thnn ::o refer to the ·~:_;:-·-:~-c:i tod ';P.r;,::, of P:2yca v. RGpt1blic 1971---72 r'\L:R M-:~l. 65, I tM.n.k I shou1.,, a1.sc mm1.t1on c.t this stage that the St::.ite clocc not 0ppose the "'tpperil. 2/ Let: me now refer to the ovic.once \:Jhich is not seriously in dispu ;;e except in somo imms.teria.l points. '1.'hc wl:wle episc,.1. G wns ns ,i:>.rratod by Mr. j·osenh Ml.i1ua (PWl), a hcspit':-1.l ~ttendant nt J{n1nuzt1 Central I--lcspi t.':1.l wl1er·e th.e appcll.2.r1t YJ,)i,,,k·'3c: ns a pl1n1"n1ac~7 nssistnn.t a job wi,ich invol vocl t~c dispe:1snt:~o:1 of c:,~·:.;gs to -,ariom: cepar.tmonts of the: hos.;,i trll. He !:old the CO'l"'t tL:lt o:-, thG r,interie.l day, J1.1rn:~ 13, 1992, he was on duty in the under-fi vo dapnrtncmt. He sr.\id thci.t at one st:::-::Je he '.!-rs; sent to tho phnrr:incy tc colJ.cct St boo:{ L~r e;hildren' s vnccinTci.c:-1 •,1hore he r.-i~t tho appcllm-1 t and ,1. Bku} him ~~o ~.ssist him fir.. J. the book. Ho did /lot fj_:,-,c :i. t. But b,~forc he L ... :ft, the 3l')pell2.n-': told nim to vr>.i t ··'1. little bit ar: he went to J.:::Jc-,k fCJ.' it ,:.,1.::wwhff;~co Mec.nwhilo, there W'."\S ,, closec car·ton. .1.1;_ t!1c roorn .'J.:1.d lie nsk-sd tr"13 v; i "'t;: .. 1cs;:; to locJ.: a:ftc-r it w'I1ilc '·1e was ""!J~s:,r. Tl-1en t!10:.'G crtmr; ~l pnt:ie;-·1t 1,1!10 A.::;~;:cC; fc,r nssistar1ce to tl1e eyo dcpar'trne;:.tt o }Io ie(! hirn th.ore an.d SlflCC tl1B :~ppollru,t had n.ot r3tux·ned he cnrr·ieci th~) c~:...r"-011 \lJi tt1 hirn e Ort ;-1is wn:; br!.t::k s• he mot was thnt he PW3 ~ n :nntron at the hos pi t"':.1., who r:.skcd him wir,t it C3~ricc.1.o He tolc1 l1cr te cl1ecl: for herself c:1.s h8 hiinself did not know :~t anc'. snid thot tho Hhen it wns oponect "':h0rc were bot: t18s of ferrous sulpha0:,,, 8.nd penicillin of ,'l tota:!. valuo of e:-'. J:•ton belo;.,gsd tc t;ho d::::r;:,eJ.l[mt. :;wo bottles of d1Loroqu5-•1e ,, two one hunc'.:ccd bottlon of "Benzyl11 1\li~3 o COG :~Ic·n.cc t!-.1.e chr;:.:~~-~e➔ \l/}:1icf1 Simply ryut the · . .,sscmc, pr~perJcy ~ 0f cau1-'sc ,Jislior:1.cstly o to bo the cf.'.so oven wh::,rc th~ of theft i.s the t:).kin~~ ..._,f qn0thor' s lmd thi.c must, th;_;:cefor.c, e1pr,e~cr chr~:r·e;o ii.;; brought unc°'.m' s. 283 ( 1) because tho 2.u~scc-t:ion me::x,ly crcc.tcm missing proporty w:-~s lnwfully in the tho '.&> 1. . L c0ntrol of· ~J10 r-./:cused i.1y virtt1e of a'1d he stole".). is i_t, tm2.ble unless, to of his 6r,1;;,~_,)y1:,ot1·i: in t:1c :)Ublie, <":Or?icc fr_ .. _.,r i.. t, bo \•;i 11 be presumi..~d to h.:r'1'e ho se.tisfiec. the ,;out't to th0 ,:;rn~tra~·y. ..,. .... .!..1., within beforG or therefore, thG fir-n to of theft cori.::,ido1"'in.z wh.cti1er the other se--:ti.0r1 (;:rer-.tinG tl10 ,_!efincd il'l s. 271 of th~ P0ri..3l Co(le, bi~C'uf;ht trn(,C!"' a. 283 ( 1) hdt the PUl, :rn PW3p t:1e tc, the his t:1"1G J"~~i1::L1 ir:. tho ro~·):~-l wi1or13 h(:: wor!-:ed o t.oci.t i ·1; ou ;_;~i ·.k whor8 ho rnct me,.tro:.1, who c..upoll..1nt, which wo.:--c cnntni;1ed so for how caxi. it ni:;costed him ~nd. 1"10 :i::s this thGft '")y thG in t!--t~~ \)ar·tc)~1? l. Ji th be when the n:,polln.,Yt cnitl th.c .:;et:.~·tc)n bolo11s0r1 ::icJr:iellnnl:: nf the drugs rcs,)::ct, I de not; thj_nk did no+ tr){0 nnothor·' s p:'opt)~ty 01' 1:1hc:t1 n0t]1fr'l[; mias~"L or nnd were tJtilJ. uncter i.:be u::nti.·ol his jcb ns e. ~>hn.r-r:1ncy nssi: .. =rta·1·,,:t:o to be bor-nc by the ovido'lc,:,. wns 1.ont., TttG CI'U~E w,Jre ~":hGre of the ::,.ppellAnt: by virtue of Theft c,mnot thcY-C:f()'_'e be sai0 3 The t.rinl cour·c 2.pp0ars to have bnsec~ the conviction ]_e_<'gcJ.y 0,1 whnt it cbserved to nF\vo bem... a failur;J on the part of the appellant to che.1. le,ig/J the confession stat0me,1t which he mad,j -to tho police when it observed thus: ?~:-re dic1 l'lOt: r·efutc t!1e in rny wn_y whatsoever. in which the st<J.tC>ment con~onts of his confession etatement f-IG die not even ::rttz!ck the mc.nJwr . ' >l; m1:1.,le volun"b:>.rily," vJit;h rcspoct? tho 0bservntion docs no-c n:oD(,ar to be quite CQrrect; question cnir1: crom~--m:ami 7.ation PW2 • the record.or of the statement• (id not for.co you by to '.ldE1.i t the c!1c1rge~i" Sl1rely ~· +J1is must have ':)een st,:.:;gestod on th•3 mi::mner in wh:.~h th.c (:~y.pollcrr;.t ,3 ... nd 9 therefore~ a.'1 ntt~cii: the? con.f'essior-1 v-1as recorded.. I+; must be obse-rvoc"l thrlt h:::=) is :~ l!:i;y r:1~11 w}10 1J1:0.s nt the trin.l. In any c0sc. I hnvo hclu. that theft at1c1 si t110r•c:;forc 9 th0.t 0'..7€:Yl if it .i~s confcssec.~~ he ccn.fessccl. -to havin.;z £:.ccG,teC t!1.2:t corrm1ited n.o offc:nce" wr:.·~ ~:he ccunse1 n0t ryrovcd t-:i0pol 1.ant to In tho 1:i.ght of the fore.t;oinr-'., I r:lJ0wed the :qppeAl in OJ)On cou::~-t on l'1n.1~ch 20 i !. G9Li-~·1t.l rx: ... £:~\YJ ti.1-:.:: P\Df. JCl.lr-.t:-1t vs irnmed:Lr?~te ::--01(.:Qse from prino;,. u"llcst1 he WF.3 heh\ for :1.;:iy lnwful renson. M.1WE in Chnmb0;:-•s thifi 25th dt>.y of Aqril 1994 et L-I Longwc. JUDGE