19700602 TZHC Dar es salaam

3 RPM ,ç.)uIPs 1' - -, IN THE HIGH COURT OP TANZANIA AT DAB ES SALAAM ( Criminal Appea].sNo. 357 - 359 of 70 (Original Criminal 0aae No., 128..o.f 1970 of the Distr- ict of Dodoma District at Dodoma. Before: P. A. Mwta Esq., D. Magistrate. 1. , MPUTWA ZANG .yrmyTeImr%T, ytr11r1rtI • ,aUXU.L.LLW AiUDJUCU. .... ...•...... 1 . - versus THE REPUBLIC .. RESPONDENIV Charge: Robbery withviolenoe c/a 286 and 285 of the Penal Code.. JUDGMENT •.1 Summary: Rejection .., .. EL..KINDY, Ag. J. — The appellants were charg with and convicted for robbery. with violence contrary to sections 286 and 285 of the Penal Code. . The first appellant Was sentenced to five years in prison, while the other fOur appellants were sentenced to three years eaoki They were also awarded cor- poral punishment of twenty-'fur strokes each. -They are now appealing against both conviction and sentences. This appeal has no merit whatsoever. There was more than enough evidence to show that the five appellants had taken part, together with other unknown in a rObbery which took place at the shop of the complainant at about midnight on 24th January, 1970. It appears clearly that the first appe- llant was thO leader and he was the one who had administered several pangs blows on the complainant mercilessly.. As a result of these blows, the complainant was, obliged to show them where he had kept his money which was then taken. Thereafter, the rest of the shop goods were carried away. It was when they were engaged to carrying away the goods that the complainant was able to see the rest of the appellants in this case. He was able to see them with the help of the lamp light. His evidence is substantial].y suppsrted by that of his wife who was with him, but who was not harmed by the appellants. The first appellant was also found in possession of a recently stolen vest which was satisfactorily identified to be part of the property stolen from the shop of the comp- lainant. The appellants denied that they took part in the robbery but the learned magistrate found against them. I am satisfied that he had enough evidence to find against them.There is nothing new stated in their memorandums of appeal. The trial magietratte tcok a very serious view of the first appellant's conduct. He was their a1g leader, and he was the one who had used the physical force on the complainant. I think he deserved the term of imprisonment of five years. As for the rest, although the sentences appear to me to be lenient, I see no good reason to interfere with them. The sentences are accordingly oonfiz I certify that after perusing the record I am satisfied that this appeal has been lodged without sufficient ground of complaint and order that it be summarily rejected. • Dar es Salaam.; 2nd June, 1970; .. 3.1. ZIlfl.4. Ag' JUDGE.