Republic vs Moris Hassan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA AT SUMBAWANGA CRIMINAL JURISDICTION SITTING AT SUMBAWANGA CRIMINAL SESSION NO. 67 OF 2022 . -T;. "W"’ REPUBLIC > ."r.j•. : .iV MORIS S/O HASSAN © ALBERT © BABA WAWILI JUDGMENT v^.x 26/08/2024 & 26/08/2024 V MWENEMPAZI J. ;• -• c. The accused has been arraigned herein this court for the offence of Manslaughter Contrary to Section 195 and 198 of the Penal Code [Cap 16 RE 2019]. It is alleged by the prosecution that Moris Hassan @ Albert @ Baba Wawili on the 9th day of July 2021 at Mtapenda village within Sumbawanga District in Rukwa Region did unlawfully cause death of one Bonitha d/o Sokoni. i As the prosecution led the facts of the case, the accused and deceased were husband and wife. In their family arrangement the accused was engaged in fishing business and his wife, the deceased, was involves in small businesses at home. In the course of their activities the husband gave to his wife (deceased herein) some money, to be exact Tshs. 200,000/= (two hundred TjVW-l,, thousand only) to keep for future use by the family; On the date, the incident occurred 08/07/2021, the accused had required his wife to give him the said Tshs. 200,000/=. The wife could not give, him the money on account that she has used. To make matters worse, the wifeleftfor her sister's home, at the camp where they were usually being hosted once they went to buy fish. That was done as a reaction to the request of the money by his husband.. '"'T-.. '• -<;s-: -i? £ j • ' if rX,_ The accused did not say anything, followed her the next day, that is 09/07/2021. He found her at her sister's residence (Tedy Sokoni). Upon arriving and asking her for the money, the wife replied in a manner showing that she had used the money and she deserved to do so, as both of them were working. A quarrel ensued and later a fight whereby in the course of it, the wife took the husband down (alimpiga ngwala). As they were fighting,' the husband took out his knife and started piercing/stabbing her on various 2 parts of the body. As shown in the Exhibit Pl, the Post Mortem Examination Report, the deceased body had multiple wounds on the right upper hand, oh humorous, upper part of the thorax area and lumbar region. The cause of death was established to be EXCESSIVE BLEEDING. As a result of investigation after the arrest of the accused person, the ?, ■ ■ ; I'j <-’1 accused admitted to have committed the offence, and he was charged with the offence of Murder Contrary to Section 196 of the PehaECode, [Cap 16 RE 2019] and today the offence has been reduced to Manslaughter Contrary to Section 195 of the Penal Code, [Cap 16 Re 2019]/That, however, is at the request of the accused's advocate, apparently after discussing with his client. Thus, the accused has, been found guilty and convicted with the ■ y ye-, ;. . \Xj!:-L ^4^ W- offence of Manslaughter Contrary to Section 195 of the Penal Code, [Cap 16 RE'ZO^W-;. •'.r Sr 'J.' ? ,7? 1 £: • : •/■r -.I:- • At the Wearing for the sentencing, the Republic has prayed for a stiff sentence as life of a person has lost. That, the accused killed the wife in a brutal way using the knife which caused profuse bleeding. They are however acknowledging that the accused is the first offender. 3 The defence on their part have prayed for a lenient sentence on the reasons that the accused is a first offender, has admitted to the commission of the offence an act which he has been admitting all along during investigation. That he has stayed in remand for three (3) years a period which has made him to be remorseful. The defence also submitted that the accused has six children and an elder wife who are dependent ori: him. He himself is 65 years .. .... W. ''WWW t old. f'W ''Mfe,,, W I have taken consideration of the facts/ aggrayating arid mitigating facts. As I look at the situation, the accused was seriously provoked as to lose his W W:.. ' temper hence to take the actions which, due to adamance of his wife brought Ty'W-. 3 them to a fight hence death of his wifeAHad it not been for a fight, may be they could have resolved the conflict in a much friendly way. Under the circumstances of the case, considering the three (3) years which the accused has stayed in prison and age of the accused person, it is a time long enough for him to learn. He is old as to be more of a burden in case he will be taken into prison for a sentence. He should carry the burden he has created for himself, that is to loose his beloved wife. 4 I therefore sentence the accused person to a conditional discharge Under Section 38(1) of the Penal Code, [Cap 16 RE 2019]. He should not commit any offence for a period of 12 months from the date of this order. It is ordered accordingly. 5