19890529 TZCA Dar es Salaam2 1

. .-. ' .(i'~'. J: It."':~· . - ii. U 1)-I!Il ~ T ~ ,4.:X)l;;jI, f)Ji ~..a;J~t.A ------ - .

AT NIBZYA ~ (CORAM: ......... - . ~KMl!E 8 ,J!A_,• KI3AXGA 2 _J_!\4!._,·AfiD M::.i'.1jI~) i I. CRilVIINAL APP-SAL NO. 9l OF. ~8 l. BOSCO lVIKU:NGI LE ' '.'. · • • ~ • • • • • • • 0 • 0 • ••••••••• ♦♦-•·t·t t t ••. 4....... •. AP?ELL.A i'-f'l' .,.· . I, j THE REPUBLIC • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .; • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • • ,. . • R];SI'()I't:'J,t;l\ T · (Appeal fr-)r.1 the, conviction of the Hi[;-l~ Court of Tanzania at Iringa)(M.r~~~, J4) dated 7th day of June, J.98~ / in JUDG-EIJfSl'-JT OF :i1Im CJURT J,VIAKAME , J • A. : As it is s2.id 1 Hope sprin_-;s ct.)rniJ.l. in the hunan brc3.st: ,' The appellant 1 BOSCO IE[(':JI:-:GILE ~ w::.s c-:mdcmnod to d.02.th for. i:;i11.n1,=,..-· on perfectly se.tisfoctJry 0vidc.'.1cc -'.?.nd his appeal agaL'lst th,1 decision. of the Hi[:,h Court (~.'..:roso, J.) is in·our v.i.81:, p_:'.'lsn,lu.tfll.Y without merit. his wife beaause ·hG was ap:pnrently in the habit ,Jf assaulting her. When she cot fed up sllc ·,:ont to the vill3 6 e .3ut~10ri ties to co_mplain and when 0fforts to effect a rcconO'iliation failed she got a certificate fro□ tl1c RGconciliation Board ta enable ....... , ~'--- her to seek divorce bef)re a c)urt of law.. The sa:-":.e cl~.,.y she 1 ··. '·· '. , got the certific2.te she r:ot kill..~d ;;y the appellant by being ' struck with a :1oe while at the l'.1uusc of her father~in-law 7 . MAMBO LS O I11ICE,TGI

LE P • 11. 4 O PW-~Ll ~as well as PWo3, GIDUL.A11LLA1'1.Aiil M'.7AGANA, who w2s botl1 the appellant's st.ep-nothGr and Roher::i.a 1 s maternal aunt, tsstif'ie.d. __ • ./2 2 whe-~ the appellant caue n.omci he found Rehema tJ:'lere: He renarked that so Rehema had refused to continue living with him and, without further ado, he stru.ck her vvi th the sharp cdt:;e of a hoe he was carrying~ Rchema died 011 tho spot fl · Aft or that the appellant went to another house vvhere ho assnul ted PW. 5 tTARIA NVI!,A 1 Rehema ts. raother, again with a hoe, after 3_._1:i.101111cinc~ to her t 9i'11ai:-1a leo ni le1' rf ~ In court at his trial tho a~':JJ)Gllant told a tail story about his finding the d0 ceased Rehm::m havinc sexual int0rc.Jurso ;;1i th a cousin of hers, one KASSHJI CHAL.AMILA, a ;·_::ore thirty pa,cos fron the house of . . Rehema' s father-in-law and as 08.rlir as at 7 JI" p .,m, Kassi □ ran away fo and the appellant assaulted tho c1ocoasod with a hoo when ho asked her 'about her vilo act and sho ansvvcrcd hir::1 rudely, just aft or she had roached tho door of the appoll2._nt I s f2thor' s house, . In tho appeal before us tho 2.ppollant's c0unsel, Mr. Tukunjoba, tried to pursue tho same lino of dofcnco, but vvi thout any success. Learned Counsel coL11:ilainod th:Jt Chelamila should havo boon called at tho trial but that did not at e.11 iapross us. As Mr. TooiJ.ba,

learned Principnl Sta to Attorney 9 subi:1i ttod boforo us, tho re v1oro oyo-wi tnosses to the unprovoked fatGl ass2ul t, c:;s w,:;11 as a bac~groimd of a sour relationship which provided 8 :..:::.oti vo for. tho unlawful killing. :T}).o story about Chalanil[: w2.s nocossarily a f2lso ono, as a l ~ o 17hx-oc ___gentlomon c.sse:soJrs and t110 laarnod tri2.l judr::o specifically found~ 1 On the: ovidcnco, tho np:;;icllant did not toll onJ,ono about tho docoasod•s adultory vvi th Chnl2:;,:il2, or indood with 2.nyo110. J)lring \11~ trial' the Defonce :put questions to soDe Prosecution . ,. rlitncssos sugg.osting that Rchona had COLE.ii ttod ndultcry with 0110 rnAULIDI KrVENE. The aµ.swors thus olici tod shovvec"'.. t~1c:.t ~ could not have h2ppcn9d \ becc.u~e it would l1avc boon tE!b.Jo in view of the rolntionship I \ existing I between Kiwcnc 2nd Rcho:.x,.o It is Jnly when tho nppollant I • I roal1zod I this tho.t ho sl1iftod c;rou:ncl and picked on Ko.ssiD as tho i \\ ' ••.• /3 ! / i \ \ .,."· - 3 adulterer, and this~ for tho first time when the appellant was himself testifying in court, ·naturally after the ·Prosecution .h.sd closed their case~ We are very rr:(ich satisfied that tho appellant killed his wife with malice afor9thow~ht and that ho was quite rightly con vi ,ted; We accord.j..ngly disniss tho appe2l,, D'ATED. at MBEY.t1 this 29th cl2y of May, 19.89:,_: i 1' ~i. ,,.,_, -✓ ,, I r' .· ,/ ., L. M~ MAICi~r/IE -. JUST I CE OF LPPEi~L '· R.H. KISLFGli JUSTICE OF f...PPE1\L L. M., rtiFl~LILA ~ .ll Ge JUST I CTi' i ~J OV ,_ ~ P., p,;, ,'-4, ·1 1•·. ·r .W.i" ;/~.,,/- ~'-._ /, ◄ -< "\ . I certify that this is n true :·:copy ~Qr. tho· o.ri·ginal ,f. ·, ~I (J. H. MSOFFE;) SEi'ff OR D~PUTY 11BGISTR1'.R ,._~ \ '< .., ""· I "~-