100

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA MBEYA SUB REGISTRY AT MBEYA CRIMINAL SESSION CASE NO. 124 OF 2022 REPUBLIC VERSUS IPYANA S/O JOSEPH KATANA JUDGMENT Date: 25 November 2024 & 10 December 2024 SINDA, J.: The accused person is charged with the offence of Murder c/s 196 and 197 of the Penal Code, Cap 16 R.E 2022 (the Penal Code). It was alleged that the accused on 9 January 2022 at Mitete-Kibisi village within Rungwe District in Mbeya Region with malice aforethought did murder one Peter s/o Michael Mwakitalima (the deceased). When the information of murder was read over to the accused person, he pleaded not guilty, hence the full trial. During hearing, Ms. Veronica Mtafya, Senior State Attorney, Veneranda Masay, State Attorney and Atuganile Kaponda, State Attorney appeared for republic while Mr. Samson Suwi, Advocate represented accused. 1 In support of that charge, the prosecution called fifteen witnesses . The nature of their evidence as testified in Court is as follows: - PW1: Victor Peter Mwakilalima, testified that on 9 January 2022, at noon he was playing with his fellow children at his grandmother’s place. He went inside their house and found his father lying on the coach bleeding on the nose, head and in the mouth. He then told his sister Elizabeth Peter Mwakitalima and their neighbor called Angel on the state he found his father. Then, they went to see his father inside their house and found him bleeding and blood was on the coach and on the floor. His sister Elizabeth told him that the person who came in the morning with uncle Musa Michael Mwakitalima came back to their house. Later, she found him running away from the sitting room. PW1 identified that person by pointing accused on the dock. During cross examination he replied that He saw the accused when he came at home in the morning. PW2: Musa Michael Mwakitalima, testified that on 9 January 2022, he was at his home in Kibisi. Ipyana Joseph Katana came to his home and said he wanted to see the deceased. He told him he is at his home. He took him to the deceased. He was in the sitting room sitting on the coach. At home they found deceased, Elizabeth and Victor. Ipyana said he went there to ask for his money TZS 46,000 from the deceased. The 2 deceased said he should give him time to look for the money like two to three days. They stayed there for 30 minutes. The accused said he wanted to go to Katumba. PW2 decided to escort him to Katumba. Around 2pm he was told about the incident that the deceased was murdered. He went home and found that the deceased was murdered. He asked Elizabeth what happened. She told him that she was in the kitchen cooking. She saw the person whom he came with in the morning running away from the sitting room. They informed the leaders that the accused committed the crime. That, he was identified by Elizabeth because he also came with him in the morning. He identified the accused in the dock and the axe. During cross examination, he stated that he heard that the deceased borrowed TZS 46,000 from Ipyana and told the olice the same. He added his statement was taken at the police. Mr. Sui prayed to tender the witness statement of Michael Peter Mwakitalima as an exhibit so as to contradict the statement made at the police and the testimony given in court and to impeach the credibility of PW2 evidence which contradicts what he said at the police station especially on the fact that he said the accused went to collect his money is not in the statement given at the police. He stated that Ipyana went 3 to greet them and there was no any loan matter. The witness statement was admitted in court as exhibit DE1. PW2 stated that he told Lusajo and Baraka that the accused was the one who committed the offence because Elizabeth recognized Ipyana’s face but did not know his name. PW2 was the one who stated Ipyana’s name to the leaders. PW3: Rusajo Anyigulile Kapinga testified that he lives in Kibisi, Kyimo ward, Tukuyu, Rugwe District. He was a member of the street government from 2019 to 2022. On 1 January 2022, around 11am, he received a call from Eliud Sanga that Peter Mwakilima was murdered. That, he was injured on the head with a blunt object. There was an axe on the side with blood. He asked Elizabeth what happened. She told him that there was a person who came with PW2 and later she saw him running from the sitting room. They started looking for PW2. Then, PW2 arrived and went to see Elizabeth. PW2 informed them that the person who killed the deceased is the accused. They started looking for the accused. They found him at club of Mpegele. Issa saw him and told him that he killed someone. He agreed and they went to the scene of crime. He identified the accused at the dock. 4 PW4: Angel Anyimike Mwakibisi, testified that on 9 January 2022, she was at home. At around noon there was a murder of Peter Mwakitalima at his house. Victor Mwakitalima, came to her house and told her his father was bleeding on the nose. She went to the deceased house and found the deceased was sleeping on the coach and bleeding on the head and mouth. She checked him and realized he was dead. She went to the neighbors for more support. They looked around and discovered under the coach there was an iron axe with blood. Elizabeth said there was a person who came with PW2 in the morning and later he came back and stayed with the deceased and later ran away. Musa was asked and said he came with the deceased. The axe was taken by the police. She was there when the axe was taken. The police took her statement and she signed the document. During cross examination she replied that on 9 January 2022, before Victor informed her that his father was dead. The accused came and asked for Musa. But she told him he is at his brother’s house. She told the police but maybe they did not take her statement. She sated that the person who was asking for Musa passed at her house around 11am. The incident occurred around 1pm. That, she didn’t see Ipyana around 1pm. She said that she took her statement at the police on that date. 5 Mr sui prayed to tender witness statement as exhibit for the defense that he said at the police station that he saw the accused at 1pm while in court she said it is 11am. Also, at the police station she said she didn’t know the person who went to her house to ask for Musa. In court, he said it was the accused. The witness statement is admitted as Exhibit DE2. PW5: Geofrey Amon Mwakomo, testified that he knows the deceased as the son of his brother. On 9 January 2022, Eliud Sanga came to his house around noon. He told him that Peter Mwakitalima is bleeding on his head, nose and mouth. He went with him to the scene of crime. He found that the deceased was lying on the coach. He was bleeding on his nose, head and mouth. He discovered that he was injured by a blunt object. He saw an axe with blood under the coach. The doctor examined the body and said the deceased was injured by a blunt object on the head. He identified the accused on the dock and the axe. PW6: Isa Adam Kasisi testified that on 9 January 2022, at 6:00am, he received a call from the village chairman around 11am to 12 noon that there was a death of Peter Mwakitalima. He went to scene of crime. He saw an axe with blood. The village chairman said Musa told him that he 6 was with Ipyana at the deceased house and later he came back and killed the deceased. They decided to go find the accused. They found Ipyana at the club. They arrested him for killing Peter Mwakilima. He confessed for killing Peter Mwakilima. At the crime scene also he confessed. He identified the accused at the dock. During cross examination he stated that he was among the people who arrested Ipyana at the alcohol club. He doesn’t know if Ipyana was drinking. On 29 January 2022, he made a statement to the police and told them that the accused confessed to killing the deceased. Kapinga told the accused that you arrested for killing Peter Mwakitalima and he said it is true. Mr. Suwi prayed the witness statement is admitted as an exhibit for the defense for assisting the court to see the difference between the explanation given today in court and that given to the police. PW6 said at the club he told Ipyana that he is arrested for killing Peter but that is not stated in the witness statement. He also said Ipyana confessed for killing deceased but the same is not stated in the witness statement. Mr. Suwi prayed the witness statement be admitted as an exhibit to impeach the credibility of the witness. The witness statement was admitted as 7 Exhibit DE3. On reexamination he stated that police were the one writing his statement. PW7: Justin Raymond Malekela testified that, he is a doctor who examined the deceased body. He testified that there was an injury on the head and blood in the mouth and clothes. Upon examination he discovered that the injury on the head was cause by a sharp blunt object. The cause of death was excessive bleeding. He tendered the postmortem report which was admitted as Exhibit PE1. PW8: H840 DC Ibrahim, testified that on 9 January 2022 he drew the sketched map at the crime scene. He was assisted by the village chairman Baraka Mwakikoli. They also interrogated and took statements of some of the witnesses who were at the crime scene. Ipyana Joseph Katana was brought as a suspect of the death of Peter Michael Mwakitalima. He was brought by the citizens. He identified the accused at the dock. The sketch map was admitted in court as Exhibit PE2. PW9: G2033, DT. CPC Pascal, testified that on 11 January 2022 he was called by ASP Kalifa Ngonyani that there was a suspect in custody Ipyana Joseph Katana, that he takes him to the justice of peace. He took him to the Tukuyu Primary Court. Ipyana was accused for the death of Peter Mwakitalima. He identified accused Ipyana on the dock. 8 PW10: Benson Mwakipesile testified that he lives in Katumba, Tukuyu and he is a street chairman. He knows Ipyana Joseph Katana because they live in the same ten cells. That, on 9 January 2022, at around 8pm to 9pm, he was called by the criminal investigation inspector who told him to go to Ipyana house. He asked if he was the street chairman. He saw there were police officers and Ipyana was under arrest. The investigation inspector told him that they are there to inspect the house of Ipyana’s aunty because Ipyana is a suspect to the death of Peter Mwakitalima. They inspected and found a light blue jean and a black t shirt with the words G-Tide which were wet. The accused was asked if these were the clothes that he wore earlier and agreed. He said he changed the clothes because they were wet. The police took a seizure form. PW10 and the accused filled in the seizure form with their names and signatures. He identified accused at the dock, the clothes and the certificate of seizure. On cross examination, he stated that he made a statement at the police on the inspection. The police came at night around 8pm to 9pm. But in the statement at the police he said that the police arrived at Ipyana place at 7pm for inspection. He stated that he think it was a typing error. 9 Mr. Sui tendered witness statement for the purposes of contradicting the witness on his defense before the court which was admitted as Exhibit DE4. On reexamination he stated that the correct time the inspection was done between 8pm to 9pm. The 7pm is a writing error. PW11: Mebo Lusekelo Kapinga stated that she know Ipyana Katana, who is her cousin. On 9 January 2022, at 6pm she was at Tukuyu Police Station following up on the case of Christopher Charles Madama. Then, she met Ipyana when she was at the reception. He asked that she become his witness when being interrogated by the police. In course of interrogation he committed to murder the deceased. She identified the cautioned statement and accused. During cross examination she stated that she went to the police around 5pm. The interrogation started around 6:40 pm. That, she took the statement on that day. Samson Suwi, Advocate prayed that her statement is admitted as an exhibit for the defense. The witness statement of PW11 is admitted as Exhibit DE5. On re-examination she said that she arrived at the police station at 6pm.The interrogation started at 6:40pm and that the statement was written by the investigation officer. 10 PW12: E8239 DT. SGT Henericko testified that he recorded the cautioned statement of the accused in front of PW11, in that statement he admitted to kill deceased. When PW12 wanted to tender the cautioned statement the defense counsel raised an objection to the effect that it shows that it was taken out of time as provided under section 50 (1) (a) of the CPA which is four (4) after arrest. The time the accused was brought at the police station and taken the statement is not known. Also, the time the statement was finished to be recorded is not known. He added that PW12 said he ended at 8:15pm and PW11 said at 7:45. He further stated that the accused did not take the statement by his own will. He was forced to sign and he was only asked to give is personal particulars. After conducting inquiry, both objections were overruled and the cautioned statement was admitted as exhibit PE3. PW13: ASP Khalifa W. Ngonyani testified that on 9 January 2022, he was at Tukuyu Police Station Rungwe District. he received the information from the village Chairman of Kibisi that Peter Mwakilima was murdered. Around 15:00hrs they went to the scene of crime at Kibisi. He was with police officers. 11 When they arrived at the crime scene, they met the village leaders including the village chairman Baraka Mwakikoli to understand what happened. Baraka told him that before the incident two people arrived at the home of the deceased that is PW2 and another person they did not recognize. But, at the house there was a child of the deceased who was in the kitchen. Around noon, she saw the person who was with PW2 in the morning coming from the house running. Baraka told him that he was given the information by Elizabeth Mwakitalima the daughter of the deceased. He told him that they are looking for PW2 and the person who was seen running from the crime scene. Musa arrived at the crime scene and said the person he was with in the morning at the deceased house is the accused. Baraka further said that there were people who were sent to look for Ipyana. After that, they went to the scene of crime and found the deceased lying on the coach with a big injury on the head. He was bleeding and there was blood in the nose and mouth. They looked around to check the weapon used in that incident. Under the coach there was an iron axe with blood on the sharp end. They also filled in a seizure form which was signed by him, Baraka and Angel for 12 them to take the axe. He directed that Angel, Elizabeth, Victor and Baraka their statement is taken. The axe was given to the exhibit keeper and labeled the exhibit with the case number. They took Musa and Helena because it was alleged that Musa and Helena might have hired Ipyana to kill the deceased because there was a land dispute between Musa, Helena and Ipyana. Musa and Helena stated its true they had a dispute and solved it as a family. They said that maybe the public do not that they have solved that issue. he discovered that Musa and Helena are not part of the incident. he then let them free. Ipyana was interviewed by Dt. SGT Henricko and confessed to commit the crime because he gave the loan of TZS 46,000 to the deceased and he never paid him despite several follow ups. In the morning, he went to remind him of the money and the deceased told he to go back in the afternoon. When he went back in the afternoon, he did not receive his monies. Ipyana was provoked and took an axe and injured him and told the deceased he will use the money to go to the hospital. He discovered that Ipyana was involved in the incident. He stated that it was raining and at the station he had dry clothes and he said the clothes he wore 13 when he went to the scene of crime, he changed them and said the clothes were at his aunty place. They went with the accused to his home in Katumba village, Kasanga Street. It was around 20:00hrs to 21:00hrs, they found the clothes on the rope. Ipyana showed them the clothes. They were wet. The clothes were jeans pale blue and a black T-shirt with the words Black Tide. They filled the seizure form and took the clothes. he signed the seizure form together with Ipyana and Benson. They took the clothes and went to the police station together with the police officers and Ipyana We left Benson. He identified accused person on the dock. The seizure certificate is admitted as exhibit PE4. The axe also was admitted as exhibit PE5. PW13 when tendering seizure certificate in relation to the clothes the defense counsel raised objection based on section 246 (2) of the CPA that in the committal proceedings this document was not committed. There is only one seizure certificate. One seizure already admitted as Exhibit PE4. After inquiry the exhibit was not admitted. PW13 stated that they seized the blue jeans and black thirty. He prayed to tender in court but the defense counsel raised objection PGO 229 (8) (9) (10) (11) and (14) GN Number 315 of 2021. That the exhibits 14 are not labeled. The said PGO 229 (8) provides that the (labels). These Exhibits were not labeled. PW13 didn’t say if he labeled them when he took the exhibits. The witness didn’t state if he labeled them to avoid the exhibits to be mixed with other exhibits. After inquiry the clothes tendered by witness PW13 were not admitted as an Exhibit. PW14: Ally Adam Mgomba, testified that he is a primary court magistrate. On 11 January 2022, in the morning he was at the office at Tukuyu Primary Court. He received the accused person from police officer called Ayele that he want to confess on commission of offence. He gave him all his rights and he confessed on commission of the offence of killing the deceased. When PW14 wanted to tender the cautioned statement the defense side objected on the point that at the time of recording the extra judicial statement the justice of peace didn’t comply with the Chief Justice guidelines on recording extra judicial statement. They referred the case of Godfrey Sichizya vs DPP, Criminal Appeal No. 176 of 2017, CAT at Mbeya at page 14 of the judgment, on the mandatory compliance with the Chief Justice guidelines to the later that in this matter the Justice of Peace did not comply with the following: (i) The time and date of his arrest: 15 (ii) The place he slept before the date he was brought to him. (iii) That if he makes a statement, the same may be used against him. This was a fatal irregularity because it could not raise awareness as to whom that statement could be used against. Another contravention is that the statement was not read to the accused for the accused to confirm what was written was in line to what the accused stated to the justice of peace. That the accused understood and what he stated is correct. He refered tha case of Mashiku Kidesheni vs R, Criminal Appeal No. 586 of 2017, at page 9 t and the case of Charles Ernest & Another vs Republic, Criminal Appeal No. 331 of 2021 CAT at Bukoba at pag 11. After inquiry the court sustained objection and the document as an exhibit. PW15: Elizabeth Peter Mwakitalima she stated that her father passed away on 9 January 2022. On that day when he arrived from her aunt, she saw Ipyana Joseph Katana seated on the chair near the door. Her father was sitting on the coach. He was waiting for uncle Musa. After sometime, Musa came. They stayed for a while and left towards Katumba. At around noon, Ipyana Joseph Katana returned to their home alone. He went inside to their father. She heard her father asking Ipyana Joseph Katana where is uncle Mussa. He said he left Mussa in Katumba. 16 She went to the kitchen. Later, it started raining. she saw Ipyana running from the sitting room. After sometime the rain stopped. Victor went inside the house. He saw their father bleeding on the head, nose and mouth. Then Victor came to tell her. She went to see their father bleeding. She also saw ana axe with blood under the chair. They informed neighbor they came. The chairman asked she told him that he was with someone who left with uncle Mussa. That person is Ipyana Joseph Katana. He looked for uncle Mussa and asked him who he was with. He said he was with Ipyana Joseph Katana. Then people were tasked to go look for Ipyana Joseph Katana. Her uncle Mussa when he arrived, he asked who committed the crime. she told him the person he left with him came back again and went inside. When it started raining he left. He told her that the name of the person he left with is Ipyana Joseph Katana. She identified accused at the dock. During cross examination she testified that She knew Ipyana by his face. Uncle Musa told her the name of the suspect was Ipyana. The chairman Baraka came to their house and when he asked her who committed the crime, she said she don’t know the person. In the evening, she was taken statement at the police station and she said the person who committed the crime is Ipyana. she knew it is Ipyana 17 because uncle Mussa told her that the person’s name is Ipyana Joseph Katana. Uncle Mussa was not at home when the crime occurred. On re examination she stated that she told Chairman Baraka that she does not know Ipyana by name but by face. This was the end of prosecution evidence. The court find that the prosecution side established a prima facie case hence the accused was invited to enter his defense. DW1 Ipyana Joseph Katana testified that on 9 January 2022, he woke up in the morning around 8am and did some house chores. At around 10am, he went to the club Mpegere in Katumba. On the way he passed by a beauty salon to greet his sister Felister James Anyaliswe. Then he went to the liquor club. he played bao then around 3pm he started drinking alcohol. At around 16:00 pm there was a lot of noise at the club. He went outside, at the door he was called by Issa Adam Kasisi. He asked him if he is Ipyana and he said yes. He then told him that he is under arrest. He was with Lusajo and other people that he knows. They boarded a motor cycle and went to Kibisi to a house of Michael Mwakomo. There were a lot of people including the police. Issa was talking to the police and told him to get in the car. They brought hand cuffs and put on his hands. The police then brought an axe. He doesn’t 18 know where it came from. They also brought a person who was covered by bed sheets on the bed. Later on, they brought Musa Michael Mwakitalima and Helena Michael Mwakitalima. Then went to Tukuyu Police Station. At the police station they put him in another car and went home for search. The other two were put in lock up. they arrived at his home at around 19:05 hours. The search ended at 20:00 hrs on 9 January 2022. They didn’t find anything. Then we went to Tukuyu Police Station. He stayed in lock up until 11 January 2022. On 11 Junuary 2022, police Ayele came and told him to follow him. He took him to an interrogation room. they found police officer Henriko in the interrogation room. Henriko asked his name and responded my names and his address, his family the school he went, the name of my mother only. He was forced to sign papers so he signs without knowing content. he never took the cautioned statement at the police station. The time stated that he took the statement he was not at the police station. he was at his home for search. In general, he denied to murder the deceased. During cross examination he stated that he was not in Kibisi on 9 January 2022. 19 DW2 Felisteer James Anyelwisye testified that on 9 January 2022, she did house chores and later went to her beauty salon at Katumba. Around 10am, IPyana Joseph katana came to her salon to greet her. He told her he was going to the club at Mpegere. The distance is not far from the salon to the club. Around, 16pm hours she heard noises at the club. Then she saw her brother with Lusajo and other people from the club heading to Kibisi. She asked what is going on, she was told there is a murder in Kibisi and her brother was involved. She never saw again Ipyana after he left her salon. She only saw him when he was arrested. During cross examination she testified that she has not submitted to court any document that she owns a salon and that she never told the court where Ipyana was from when he passed through her salon. Having heard the witnesses in this case, I have no doubt that the deceased died and it was unnatural death. This was proved by postmortem report which “Exhibit PE1” that his death was caused by excessive loose of blood. It is the position of law that when a charge of murder is preferred against an accused person, the onus is always on the prosecution to prove not only the death of the deceased but also the link between the alleged death and the accused person. The prosecution must prove the case, the standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt. 20 In case of Mohamed Said Mutula vs Republic [1995] 3 it was held that; “Upon a charge of murder being preferred; the onus is always on the prosecution to prove not only the death but also the link between the said death and the accused; the onus never shift away from the prosecution and no duty is cast on the appellant to establish his innocence.’’ The main issue of determination is whether the evidence adduced by prosecution linked the accused person with the offence of murder. I have gone through the evidence adduced by the prosecution side in this case and find that there was no eye witness who witnessed the accused killing the deceased. The evidence which link the accused with this offence of murder is circumstantial evidence and the accused cautioned statement. Starting with circumstantial evidence, it is a trite law that for a conviction to be based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must be undoubtedly connecting the accused to the commission of offence. This was stated in the case of Ecksevia Silas and Another v. the Republic, Criminal Appeal No. 93 of 2011 (CAT at Mtwara, unreported), the court of appeal while quoting its previous decision in 21 Shaban Abdallah v, The Republic, Criminal Appeal No. 127. Of 2003 held that; “The law on circumstantial evidence is that it must irresistibly lead to the conclusion that it is the accused and no one else who committed the crime” See also the case of Crospery Ntagalinda @ Koro V R, Criminal Appeal No. 312 of 2015, CAT-Bukoba In this case PW15 testified that on the material day when she arrived at home from her aunt, she found the accused sitting near the door and the deceased was sitting on the coach, after sometime, PW2 came. Then PW2 and the accused left towards Katumba, around noon, the accused returned back to the deceased home alone, he went inside to her father. Later she saw the accused running from the sitting room. Then PW1 entered inside the house and found the deceased bleeding on the head, nose and mouth came and told her. She went to see their father and found that he was bleeding. Also, she saw an axe with blood under the chair. She said she identified the accused face because he was their neighbor. She used to see him going to his grandfather house. She narrated the incident to village chair when she was asked on was with 22 her in the sitting room, she told him that her father was with someone who left with PW2. This piece of evidence was corroborated with the evidence of PW2 who stated that on the material day he was he was with accused person to deceased home. He said that the accused went to collect his debt of TZS 46000 from the deceased. The deceased told him that he doesn’t have money on that day. Then, he left with accused to the deceased home. they went to Katumba and departed ways. I find that this evidence of PW2 and PW15 lead to the conclusion that it is the accused and no one else who committed this crime. This circumstantial evidence was corroborated with the evidence of the cautioned statement from the accused person. The accused confessed to commit the offence. In this case the accused denied to make the cautioned statement during hearing but was admitted as exhibit PE3 after enquiry. It is a trite law that the court can rely on a retracted or repudiated confession in convicting an accused person where the same is corroborated by another independence, the court however, can rely on uncorroborated retracted or repudiated confession when it is satisfied that the confession contains nothing than the truth and after warning itself of the dangers of relying on such evidence. 23 In the landmark case of Tuwamoi v Uganda (1967) EA 84. The court stated that; “A trial court should accept with caution a confession which has been retracted or repudiated or both retracted and repudiated and must be fully satisfied that that in all the circumstances of the case that the confession is true. The same standard of proof is required in all cases and usually, a court will act on the confession if corroborated in same material particular by independent evidence accepted by the court. But corroboration is not necessary for law and the court may act on a confession alone if it is fully satisfied after considering all the material points and surrounding circumstances that the confession cannot but be true” See also the cases of Mkubwa Said Omar vs. SMZ [1992] TLR 365, and Mbushuu @ Dominic Mnyaroje & Another vs. Republic [1995] TLR 97, Hemed Abdallah vs. Republic [1995] TLR 172 (CA) and Michael Luhiye vs. Republic [1994] TLR 181 I have gone through the cautioned statement of the accused person, in his statement the accused admitted to killing the deceased and he used an axe. He stated that he went to collect his debt from the deceased and the deceased told him that he can’t pay him the debt of last year. After that, the accused decided to take an axe which was in that sitting room and attacked the deceased on his head. 24 Based on the circumstance of this case, I find that this the evidence adduced by prosecution side proved that the accused killed the deceased but it was manslaughter and not the offence of murder. The evidence of the cautioned statement show that the deceased borrowed money from the accused but he was stubborn in paying that debt. On the material day, he stated that he cannot pay the debt of last year. In my view these words provoked the accused person and led him to commit the offence without malice/intention. The accused on his side denied to commit the offence and stated that on the material day he didn’t went to kibisi. That, he was at his home, and later on around 10:00 am he went to visit DW2 at her saloon and went to club while there later on he was arrested for the offence of murder. The fact that he went to greet DW2 was also corroborated by DW2 but there was no evidence adduced to prove that before he went to DW2 he was at home and that he was at club until he was arrested. Also the accused person stated that he did not admit to the offence at the police station. He added that at the police station he was taken only his address and he was forced to sign papers. But among of the prosecution witness, PW11 was the accused cousin. She testified that he witnessed the accused recording his cautioned statement at the 25 police station. I find no reason for this witness to fabricate the case against the accused. Even the accused person did not state if he have any conflict with PW11. In that regard I believe that the accused person was recorded his cautioned statement at police station as alleged and admitted to committing the offence. Based on the above analysis, I find that the prosecution managed to prove the offence of manslaughter and I convict the accused person for the offence of manslaughter C/S 195 and 198 of Penal Code Cap 16 R.E 2022 . DATED at MBEYA on this 10 Day December 2024. A. A. SINDA JUDGE 26 SENTENCE I have considered both the mitigation as well the aggravating factors. The republic has asserted that although the have no criminal record of the accused, nevertheless be punished according to the law. The defence requested the accused to be given lenient punishment because he is the first offender and has been in remand for almost two years. Considering all that and taking into account the weapon used and the report on Postmortem examination, I hereby sentence the accused to serve a seven (7) years imprisonment. It is so ordered. Right of appeal is explained. DATED at MBEYA on this 10 Day December 2024. A. A. SINDA JUDGE 27