19870909 TZHC Tabora 1

. , Filj[if:ktlit~lfflf._¥..,,'!}-~· · "·';" ·•r 1 --0\Pi ••• • , · • · . • ·!_ ·•·,· · ·"~ '· • ·• •~ · - -. ~;:11~"'.' /~J,-.-:. . :\._ - ; -· - -· - . !. . . . ,. . -. _~_\_,,·_·_t_,:-_"' ---~ ~,.•._...:.._:~ :_.;_·:_·_·,.:,•;:r~_-. _J:.:·~_£:~J'.~-OOT3.?·-C2 ...T_·3_'.:~J!:i..:___,... . . . . ...~~ '._ ~:~~-~ .· • r/ : __;.~-.~-"~--L•-i.~_:_::,l;!':- __ t~_-~-·. .. v~·... ~ •• .:-,·.· 0 _"f.,_:..~~·-. ~<_..7,,J_\· .. __ .·_.: . . liT l'll."i:if'\R'· ~~"'-~~ \\,\r- \-\ ':\ ,.---- . .. . . : .. ""\ ·: "1- · :·:. ·•t;"'-- ·,. . XPPXLJJ.AT E J URI SD! CTI op (,.,., . ,-.L:abora . . ) Ii Regis-cry ; (EC) CrtilITl1 i>L .i~PI'E.AL NO. 47 ~ cf' 4c$' OF 1981 e t . ORIGI:JLL CffjJ.:'.INAL CASE NOt 17 OF 1985 OF THE DIS'I-BIC: COURT 0-F KJTE01 ,DO JJ.[STRICT hT KIIDNIX) Before; z. BURTON DANI EL ., •••• ~ ••••••• o • • ~- • • • . • • • • • • A~PBL:S.ANT . V,Jrsus I_ (Or::i.e;inal .Accu.sed) TH-,;; RT;TT):u~1- ., t R.,...c•-:-io':r~·,=,.-.Trt1 ~ .ili _b l f,j > ·6 o o o o o o o • o • • o o o { • • • o • o • o .• .:::iu.c:- .l~ J.d~n J. t . ·I ( O:i;iginrfl ?ro seo utor) I CJHRGE~ Offi~0 3reaJdng and Stealji;:o.g c/s 296 ( l) t:;,nd 265 of the Penal Code Cap. iG,i The two and Zirahenda Biri?cro, we·re chare;- d. jointly with two othertJJ .· I with the offenGe of robbe-ry- with · ·.i.r)+cmce e/ss. 286 a:r1.d 285 ! of the Pena.i Code befo:::e Kfl;.)o.ndo Ls·t;~~ic ;-; Cbtn"t·& The

two appellants and the second accuse6 i ,_er~rt wer::) convicted a~ charged and each .vas sentenced t<. '-•3ev.·c~ ye.a.rs imprisonment. The third accusr;1d was acg_ui tted., I I Dissatis±·iec., tiJ.,3 ·c~vo appel r:r. . ts 1.!.aVe. appealed to thi ..1_ I t Court again$t their convictions rd se.r.t·~e-nces .. The prosecution's evidence E:nding t:i .. · · to. I connect the two. ':lpp-Bllants and. t -<Jir coll.eagues with· th_e ·oommi.s.si,on of the offence is the · of a sB1glG Witness, one ·Mahwera Muntu (P.,lilol) who was a· atchman en di,ty during .,,.,,,..· ,..,. the night of the ro'bbery., P.Wel 1, evidenc1-~ is· to the ~f.fect that on the night of the ;u.bbery, -r_\_:;1.t is 11th/12th February; 1985 8 at abollt 2a00 al.,, a group, of abo11t :f.ou.r:· ·bandits broke into a· C oC .M. OfL i0 at KlJlllw,s.mbu village ih . , ... .::,p_eziu r..-::ter the bandit, had opened the door-, so P.Wo-:". --r;,- .:fi;i.fied, hie woke up~ bu.t. 11- .J.. \. 2 the bandits ord cred him to bend down and not raise • any alarm. P,.W ,1 apparently complied, and the bandit, ransacked the office 2...nd took .1wa:y with them shs .. 5,22"/-=• rt ·was after the bandits had· left that P.W.l rais~d an alarm" Some people answere(l the ~larm; bu.t by then the bandits had disappearedo I P.W.l claimed in his evidEnoe that he had identified the culprits to have been the t9G appellants and their tern

co-:.(~c1Jpon persons with the '.aid of a lamJ.l, The two appellants and theJ:::~ colleagu.es pleaded I alibis: the appellants and the Ji-cond accLJ.sed said that f during the nieht. in q_u.estion thc;r we1~e at a funeral at a neighbour.' s house where thoi:r· rcc:;i~-:;:1.bour had lost a cht,ld. ·<' The · third ac c u.s ed' s alibi was tY~ t du.ring the material period, he was away to Tabora,, The story of th'? twc ,..,~~.~:_1..irr~·, :.r.c:: that of the 2n4 a~cused was corroborated by the ·,:Jereaved father - D.W.5 1 In convicting the appellan: ,:i a.L:::. the second accused, the learned trial magistrate s:-1. :rl that he believed P.W.~ to be a straightforward ana. vei:' truthful witness withou.,t in any was addressing himself a i to the circ umstanc ea ai,.li manner in which P.W.l claimed tJ have identified the culprits. It is now well settled thE~ i~ o~dcr to just~fy a conviction solely -on evidence cf. identification of a CU\i>ri t, eu.ch evidence must be watertigh ·:;" (See R .. v .. Eria Sebwet,1t,' fl960) E • .A. 17 4)" Y\There the ev Lnence is that of' a singl~ witness in circumstances not f&:r,,uring a correct identi..,. fi~Qtion, the court should loo!, for other evidence, dirett or circums+,q:n+.; qJ ,,r'h~ ,.._,,. ::::•Je~~ i >. show that the evidence of identificattc:'1 is free f.rcm ;'.1 l :J poGStbili ty of error, (See Abdalla..11 bhi_ Vh:1.do v ~ Ji- ? ', E. f..

C, A. 166 J.o A wi tn;fe may be quite truthful bu-t 1:1e cc ;_ld be innocently mistake,.• ~See Ath umani l;J_:~),__ 31'~.::,;;,:_J:.. ~-1.• .. j_ 2...~ L :...." ( _i.':- ·: 6) LRT n. 15) • In the instsn+; oase.9 -t:i'.1E: e11d2nce of identificatiai,. . / - 1 as pointed 0u+. 0.ar~ier, is. tbat cf r-. :::ingle witnesse Th., ') ti t. __ J , 1. f..· .... ~ ·.~. ~.r:. ·,··-:Lnc.i dent- ·-oec-urred- a-t about 2. 00 am., and P. W.1 -was· ..e.!'o.U.e-~d was trom sleep. The only light_ ther~_ wa.slfrom a hurrieene lamp, and there is no evidence af to how far it was tro~. the culprits or how much light if ~rovided. In other ~:f(,til. t-t is plain that the circ umstanc~e:. didnot'I'~lir a corz-e1; identification. Besides, there~i:., no other evi~e:i;ice, dt:.iii or circumsta..'1.ti'3.1., from which to 'ir1fer that the evidence of identification by P. W.1 is freie from any possibility ol error. There is yet ano~her weakness in p.W.l's evidence, Nowhere did this witness give a descriptio_n of any of tb.' Qulpri ts, either in his evidence in court or to a poli9e officer or any other person. In tbe n.bsence of such description, P. VI .1 1 s evidence of id e11tification loses ~Uf4 I of its value., am_ed_b_i_·n_1,.._il=J.J-J. v. R., 9 E.A.C.A, '~•- (See: ~-'-1_oh____ In short., the evidence of ide;Jc-Lfication of the culp~ i.n this case ca,.'1.Ilot be said 'tu ~la.'\· 1: u~. en watertight,

parlle ll4arlY in the face of the ancused >-:r·son' s strong ali?i~, For the foregoing reasons, I '0spectfll.l.ly agree W1 ~h ·m.-, Matupa, learned state atto:rncs, that it wou.1d not be safe· to sustain any of the convic•l _ems in this case • .Acscordingly., the appellants• conv:i :,tions are hereby quash~f, . 8J1d their sentences and orders o:f ~'ompensation set aside, The. two appellants shall be relear cd from custody forthwt,n unJ.ess otherw:i.~e further held in r o:me other lawf'ul connertt,Q" In the exercise· of this cou.rd31 revi_sional juri•sd:i.'Qtiol\l I also quash the conviction of Kilimba Masele, the seoon!· accusea at the trial (who has not nppea.led) and set aside the sentence and orde::- of compens: tiono He too shall be released from c1.1stody ~.Appellant absent. Mr. Matupa for Rep!.:hlic \, 9/9/87. "'"--, ' '", ·,. ~--~ ! \ ____ _,.,, ~--- ' ··----- _\\_ ....... \~ \ ', ' '·