Republic vs Ladslaus Richard Ntinda Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA AT SUMBAWANGA CRIMINAL JURISDICTION SITTING AT SUMBAWANGA CRIMINAL SESSION NO. 40 OF 2022 REPUBLIC 1. LADSLAUS s/o RICHARD @ NTINDA 4? 2. RAYMOND s/o KIZILA @i MELIKIO '"W. 'Wfz 19/08/2024 & 19/08/2024 Ba MWENEMPAZI, J. The accused persons, Ladslaus s/o Richard (g) Ntinda and Raymond s/o Kizila @ Melikiocharged with the offence of manslaughter contrary to section 195 of the Penal Code, [Cap 16 R.E 2022] it is alleged that the accused persons named herein on the 23rd November, 2021 at Matanga Area within Sumbawanga Municipality in Rukwa Region did cause death of one Ignas s/o Boneventure. The incident occurred while the accused person and others not in court were patrolling their Local area to ensure safety of the community around and i their properties. The event occurred during the night. The deceased victim of this case, was suspected to be a thief and his explanation of walking in the street at late hours was not believed. As result and due to mob reasoning they decided to punish him. In the process of beating the victim suffered injuries and he died due to loss of blood termed'Hhternal and external bleeding as per exhibit Pl. The Post Mortem Examination Report prepared by Dr. Elina Yesaya who conducted the said examination. ‘ "Tv On the same day the accused persons were arrested and some of the " v,4. perpetrators were not arrested: Upon investigationthe prosecutors in the National Prosecution Services Authority filed charges of Murder Contrary to Section 196 of the Penal Code, [Cap 16 RE 2022] and today the accused have prayed to plea to the lesser offence of Manslaughter Contrary to Section 195 of the Penal [Gode, Cap 16 RE 2022] which prayer have been granted. In short, they have pleaded guilty to the charge Manslaughter Contrary to Section 195 of the Penal Code, [Cap 16 RE 2022] and upon admitting to the facts constituting the offence they have accordingly been convicted with the offence of Manslaughter Contrary to Section 195 of the Penal Code, Cap 16. 2 During sentence hearing the prosecution have prayed that a stiff sentence be meted to the convicts. The prosecution has asked this court to consider that a human life has been lost and the convicts used unreasonable force in dealing with the victim after they had caught him in the night. It is the opinion of the prosecution that the convict and their colleague ought to have verified the explanation they received from the victim instead of beating him. On the other hand the defence attorney Mr. Deogratius Sahga has prayed for lenience on a number of reasons.’ That the convicts are first offenders and that they found themselves into conflict with the law due to mob action. In short they are the victims of the circumstances. That they came into trouble while conducting patrol for the safety of the community and their properties. They had their mission to ensure the society in their Local area is at peace; unfortunately a mob action made them turn to where they are today. Both accused persons are old 54 and 62 years old respectively and they are now suffering to ailments due to old age. That the convicts have been in remand for two years and nine months and in that lapse of time, they have learned and that has led them to be remorseful hence their admission today. The counsel for defence has prayed for lenient 3 sentence and or forgiveness citing Luke 17:4 in the Bible. He has prayed this court to consider time spend in remand and argued that if it pleases this court should consider a community service order instead of imprisonment as par Section 27 (2) of the Penal Code. I have heard the aggravating factors and mitigating^factors from both '-A-';:! , A; prosecution and defence respectively. I take note that the accused persons found themselves into conflict with the law in the course of ensuring peace to the society they live. I believe, had it not been for the mob action, may ■■■■>. "‘"WAY- be, the decision. At the scene would have been different from what happened. I am aware they were many and same went at large save for them who were identified and named. On one hand protection of the people and their properties is a commendable action for people to engage in actively. However those working in the process should be aware that even those sensed as a threat must be taken to the relevant authorities for proper and legal handling. For that matter, I am of the opinion that, the time spent in remand is a lesson to the convicts. I would add a sentence for conditional discharge 4 under section 38(1) of the Penal Code, Cap 16 RE 2022 for them not to commit any offence within 12 months from the date of this order. It is ordered accordingly. Dated and signed at Sumbawanga this 19th day of August, 2024. '‘"•i r-ft’ Judgment delivered in court this 19th day of August, 2024 in the presence of Mr. Mathias Joseph, Learned State Attorney for the Republic and 1st and 2nd Accused person and their advocate Mr. Deogratius Sanga, Advocate. 5