19710325 TZHC Arusha
The conviction was upheld as the evidence established unlawful possession, but the sentence was manifestly excessive for an amateur offender and should have been a fine or a term resulting in immediate release.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19710325 TZHC Arusha
- Parties
- Appellant: Aloys s/a Hama; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 25 March 1971
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- conviction upheld, sentence varied
- Legal Topics
- Unlawful Possession, Sentencing, Liquor Laws
- 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
Aloys s/a Hama
Appellant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for unlawful possession of moshi was proper
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was excessive
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction was upheld as the evidence established unlawful possession, but the sentence was manifestly excessive for an amateur offender and should have been a fine or a term resulting in immediate release.
Court Disposition
conviction upheld, sentence varied
Orders
- Sentence of 18 months imprisonment set aside
- Appellant sentenced to such term as results in immediate release
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
/p IN THE HIGH COTJRT OP TJZANIA AT ARtJ SHA J?PELLATE JURISIDCION HIGH COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2211971 ORIGINAL CRIMINAL CASE NO. 273 OF 1970 OP THE DISTRIcT COURT 0FPARE DISTRICT AT SA]1E Before C.H. Msamati EsqDistrict istrate ALOYS s/a HAMA .......................... Appe]JL.ant (Original Accused) ~i~ 'l ersus / THE REPUBLIC . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Respondent . . (Original Prosecutor) • CHARGE: Unlawful possession of Liosbi c/S 3001 the Moshi (Manufacture and Distillation) Act No, 62/66. /JUDGMENTJ WIKIMA, AG.J. The appellant was convicted of unlawful • possession of machi c/s 30 of the Noshi (Mamfacture and Distillation) Act No. 62/66, He was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. He now appeals against conviction and sentence. The facts as given by the two prosecution witnesses were that on 6.11.70 the appellant was seen riding a bicycle along Langata road. He had a big bundle on the carrier of his bicycle. He was stopped an when the bundle was search-ed a tin (capacity not indicated) was found presumably wrapped up in that bundle. It was full of moshi. Both the witnesses who were police otficers experienced in the identification ofthe liquor testified that they had no doubt that the stuff was mosbi. The learned trial magistrate believed them and I find no cause to contradict him. The conviction of the appellant cannot be faulted. There can be no question however, that the sentence awarded to the appellant was manifestly excessive. In the first place the appellant should have been glven the option •- of paying a fine in order that he may have avoided getting in touch with dnerous or hardened criminals in jail. In cases where the 1Lecused is an occasional or ameteur offender it is normally 4propriate to award a fine. This was the view of Georges O.J. in liadja Omari v R 170fiCB 158. In this case there is no ev-ience that the appellant was more than an amateur or occasional offender. He must therefore be hold to be so. Accordingly I w i ll set aside the sentence of the appellant. In substitution thereof I order that the appellan who has been in jail since 18.11.70 be sentenced to such terw as will result in his immediate release. 4rusha 25.3,1971 'ci