N

IN THF HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA . i· . : ; : :·, ' :..' . · .APFFLLATF '" JURISDIC'I'ION '. ( ~ ·... ; HIGH COUR'l' CRI~IN1\L APPEAL NO. 378 OF 1977 Cf.·" CRi. APP. 379 · of 1977 • . ,· . . .. ORIGlNliI:, CRrHNlH, ci;SF NO. 28 OF 1976;. . OF-THE llIS'llUCT. CODRT ·OF BUKOBA DISTRICT ~.T BUXOBii BFF·ORF ;'.: G.·•:KJlYAGA, ESQ.,' DIS'lRICT MAGISTRATE.· DAV ID ?:-f SHliNDETE NKULILA •••••••••• versu.e· · . THE REPUBLIC ••• ~ •••••••••••••••••••••• •.••••• •. • RESPONDENT . : ; '• J u'n a M F ~ T ·' ., SISYA 1 J. Tho two appellants ·an9' a. t;hird .person· who ·,was,. acqµj.ttecf by :the trial 11agistrate ware chargca with si"llple th~·ft con·trary to sopt.fon 265 of the Penal Code. The appellants were·· c·onvieted and each·· wiis • .. ,aents~ced :to. fou1 yl!ars i~pr;i.s91:1"llent. Thi:,y ar~. now app13alinge : • , , . • • • I • ' • .-. ' • ."~ • • !I •• : :· Fvid~n·ce' :;..as·' led at thb tr'ial to th~ eff~ct that thEl first' . ac_9~~~c.<;1 who· ln,~ift'7pJ~liY~ .is. t:h,~. pers.on who. was acqu:i_~,ted and ~~~~: S"cond accu'.shd \'mrEf Pol:ice officers'· whereas th<! third. accus~icf was a sol,ilier ·9f 't,he Ta:rl'zania.· Pe'bple.~ ,D;:f9noe''. Force.• ' Th;,y' all ·p'.~.$ed at)(~riyizo w~r~ Pr~ila_ry Co_ur.t:; ip the B\.ilcob·a Dis.trict of the We.st La~e-~Jcgio:1/ whi:oh ~s cl,ose t.o '.l,!le .. 1>ord_nr wi tp. Uganda. On 23rd :-l'ay, 1975, acti,ng ~pon 'infor·11ation. r·ec~.iveci,. th.e. second' and third. accused persons ..i-lho,. incidentally, · a·re now tho·'appellanh, wsnt·· t~,'\'he:.house. of th;'3 co:nplainant and arrested . 'hi:n on' suspic'io\m ,ha\' he had with him some P'gandari" .curren.cY• The, two : accused took tile co:npla:inant with the~ to the oif.ice ancf. handed :.nim i:r . over to th~ 'first aocus!,~ who was thE'ir a~nior. · ,.efter deny{ng -possession .... of pllY fo_~~\gn 'a~1·r~ncY: 'the . COJlplbin~n t. was,. place_d Jn the loc~·-up·: while ·,• tho· second· ~iid. third'. a.c:'cused persons· took the. co11pl_s:,:,in~.t.•s s,on,. P.• W.3, . , to the complaina'ht.~·e' hous-3. for: Cl soar"eh. This. ii~i4od· Sh.s.4,}80/;;· in Ugiindan c\fr'rency, ~ni'ch was then seizr·d by th" 1nfor~e:nent. age·nts. la·w- Whcit actu.allyhappenad on thc1r'retu..rn is suhj<:1ct.of'so:ne·contrc::diction in the evidence· o-:f . the co11plainant·, and his son, P.W.3 • . . . . ; ~ ' ~ "' Accor din~: to. the,. co11plain~nt .when the ei3 cond and 1,hird acc~·sed persons arrivea · with ths :noncy the first accused haif hi:n, i.o~ · ti-.~ complain- ant, romovad fro:n the lock-up. Th~y all th~n, tM~luding F.W.3 1 croi in a roo~ whore 1st, 2nd and 3rd accusAd countod the :noney b~forc socond accused handed it a_ll over to first accused, According to P. W.3, howov:?r, be did not enter i.hi\. r9oif_ where first,: second and third accu.s!'ld parsons and the co~plainant·were. ConseqU€ntly he did not witness what wont on inside th1:1 roo:n. ·····NP.vorthaless th~ story that th13 :non13y was ha11d- d 0 over to tho first accused was suspport d by both s~oond and third acc~ssd. 0 Fnvo~.:t.u<?J*y .. the_ 1 ~011plain~nt.--was rP.tU,rMd to the lock-up where he spent tho night~ On the foliowing day he was brought b':!fOM the first, second and third accus~d persons. The first accusnd then told hi~ that ho was fr<'1e "and• added -"usiende huko- kus,.,,,a i,a:nbo :ner1.gi. 11 The co11plainant aski:>d fo~·,h;1s_:~oney_ to, which the first accused retorted, "Usis011c pasa, utarudishw:'l ndani". The co11plainc;nt went 2way without the 11onay. ~ WAnt bnd-i!pbited ihe 11attQr ~o thP local authorites. Ev~ntually th~ -natt>'!r rnach.,:,:1. thr- r:.ars of the o.c.D., P.w.4. Envontuall;y thl'l accus-~~ w"r," "rr<:st,,a ::-1 ·ubsrqur.ntly ci:1c:rg9d. · l 2 • Both second and thi~d·a~cus~d ~d~sbn~ in. their.r~sp~ctivc d:fencAs ad11itted that th~y w,:,nt to thr co11plainant's house on thtJ_ :natorial day and apprehended hi11. They handed .hi!11.", ...i.:e~. co-nplainant, to t~o first accusE>d who was their senior. Th~r~after th~y went and seized the money in Ugandan currency which th,:iy also subsc·qucmtly hdhd.,:d: ·~~~r to first accused. 1 '\ In a cup.rise judg~"llc'nt. tr~-3 t-rial :ncigistrait~- ,said. thdt he we.s not satisfied thc:,t th"! 11on~y rnachA<i the first a-0cuse.d.:;becausc the first accused hi1tself deni~d s~~ing thq ~oney and, s~condly, b~causc P.W.3 1 P. W.l --wc.·s 11 conti:>.ndcd. that h<J. did n:ot sqci' ·th;,:,:noney:·whei:l his f.athP1' taken to_. fi-~s't accused." TM· 1iarriPd 11agiatrate, 'niliwe·ver, found that the case against second and third accusP.d.- ·hkd •.been.,:p~<.i.vPd beyond rf'asonabl-- doubt and proc~eded to convict the:n. ~ r ~· ' . - , ' : • ... • ••• • 4 .• • . ~·. . In their 11e::iorandu11 of appeal both appellant contend ti.at t.~·1e evidP.nce on r,-icord is ins~ficicnt to· establish tneir guilt beyond doubt • .. . T cannot'"forehear· tii.' ti;.is··s-t.age: -to- pean~... .out. \that th:i appecils hoistle with :neri t. licco-Ming .. t.o.,.. ..:t.o,e, co,:nplainan t hi11self the appt}llant in fact gave th':! 11cney to the first nccusPd. F'or sc:nt? unknown ro::.sons, if any at all, thP. tr.ial_ nagistrc.tc c_nos~, t_c _\gn_ore tni,s. i~~.ortan·t_ pie'.ce of r:1vidonco. It seands possib1,, th2it in convicting· the appc1::l-an,ta·. the trinl 11agietr.:.te was inf;luanccd 1:>y thB f .. ct that the appallan-ts we~• tho on ..: who w0nt and. r7ctuaI1.y ·sei:~d; ~tho -non,::y frc;n tho co""plainant' s housP. If so th"n the lt:arncd magistrate erred b':'.caus" it is cl<'ur from the ovidancf! on record th::it up to th~ point when the appeiia:rfta""-~nded over the money to thAir simior, 1hQ first accused, th<'ly _were acting in :due cours!'! ,:of tha.ir duties. ·· '· • 1 What thrn is the. evidr.nQr. atainst ~hese· appellant in .. tho _cai°3a? l find none. Thi' co11plainant in his evide"nce Said' that it was t.hP fi?st accus~d wl1o:'.rP.c"ived the 11oncy•. On tho following day it was the first accuse.d how threatened· hi 11. with fUl'th,,r confinciiont if he ·irisistond en de11anding his, mc-n<;:y back. Thr~.;complainont oven went on to ac.a· th'-'t the .appellant "did not:s~y anyth~.ng.il,l r~lation to thP. i\0nP.y.i 1 Now;,-dces the :ncrc fa_ct _thi:it thP. appellants kP.pt q1.11tn. when their· scnio:r, first accused, ref.used }o rt'tµrn t,ha 'l'on:iy to th;:,· 'c_c,iplainMit ·'Tlfan that_·_they •.•. wer"3 acting,inconcn_twith hi:n, i.e. first accused? On the cvidi'ince ·'. ~-on record I .,;newer .. :this qu:3Stion in· the negative. With rr;spcct to the lec.rne.d trial ,iagistrate the evidence en r"'ccrd· plaves the bla:nc for th1 disappearance of t·he squar~ly on th1~· shouldP.rs of the first accus0d. Fortun~t.0).y, tor hi;n he was· acqui 1:,'t°ed and_ tho state has· not appealed against tha sc:id acgui ttai •.. :tfovertneless, suffice it to ·say , .... ,tflfl,t the· .aviden_ce _on recb'.t'd is not .sufficient·· to ·sustain the conv·fctions -again.st. th_o appel;lan~s. T,h-:1:- .ftOilVictions a"re th.0:refore qu.a_shod and • : : thG senta_~ces passed on the appellc:mts are,_ accordingly sot· aside .. In the. ·f.in.al .re SW. t these' ~ppaa.ls are e1llowed.· . Consequently. it is hereby directed th"'t, unl,<!ss tho'y are othe'rwise being lawfuliy held, both appellants should_ . be . rele.as,::.d . from .. . custody for.thwith. . ': ,-. . ·•. ' t 1 . ·.• . Sgd.: H. E. SISYA '·: JBDGE' . . , ., . .... . '•·~•· •·~