19700526 TZHC Dar es salaam
I N THE 'ri •COT Op TAZIA at Dar cc Salasm. L / ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CEININAL APPEAL NO 288 OP 1970 ('Original Criminal Case No 70 of 1970 of the Djtrict Court of Tenga District at Tanga) Before D. P. iapigano . ..,... Resident Maglstrate. RAAIAhI MOTANE ..,..,. APPELLANT versus THE REPtThLIC .............
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19700526 TZHC Dar es salaam
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 26 May 1970
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
No structured case brief is available yet for this judgment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
I N THE 'ri •COT Op TAZIA at Dar cc Salasm. L / ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CEININAL APPEAL NO 288 OP 1970 ('Original Criminal Case No 70 of 1970 of the Djtrict Court of Tenga District at Tanga) Before D. P. iapigano . ..,... Resident Maglstrate. RAAIAhI MOTANE ..,..,. APPELLANT versus THE REPtThLIC .......... RESPONDENT CHARGE':- Robbery with violence c/s 2$5 and 286 of the Penal Code 'Cap 16. 7gDGMENT SuinryRejction EL-XINDY, AG. 3 - The Appellant was charged with andconvicted for robbery - with violence a/s 285 and 286 of the Penal Code Cap 16 He was sentenced to a term of two years and twenty-four strokes He was also ordered to refund a qum of shs. 120/= allegedly to have been robbed from the comp1ainant He now appeals 'against both conviction and sentence. in his memorandum of appeal, the appellant stated that the trial magistx ate was not entitled to accept the evidence for the proseculon as It was unreliable: in pticuiar the learned magistrate should not have accepted the evidence of the two witnesses who alleged that they. Caw the appellant running sway from the complainant inundiateiy after the incident. It was established that the complainant was hit hard, and then robbed shs 120/ when be was walking back from the shop where he had gone to buy sügar Jogo (PW3)and Mobamed (PW4) said that they witnessed the Incident', The appellant denied that he was the one who conimitted this off enee, and he repeated this in his appeal memorandun. Having examined the record, I find that there is nothing to suggest that the learned magistrate was not entitled to believe the evidenés of the cominant as supported by that of the two witnesses mentioned The case is based on credibility of , witnesses, and I'see no reason to differ from the findings of the learned trial magistrate. The Cenence awarded is the minmum provided for by law. The appeal has no merit. I certify that after perusing the record I am satisfied that this appeal has been lodged without sufficient grounds of cc plaint and order that it be rejected si.mari1y. Dai és Salasm. 264.70 GD '( Z. N. E14u.xxm)r) AO. JIJDC-E.