19700813 TZHC Dar es salaam

- IN THE HIGk COURT CF ANIA At ar es Ca1am Criminal Ap cal No. 416 of 1970 (Original Criminal Case No. 526 of 1969 of the District Court of iringa District at Irina) Before: B.$.Hoza District .igistrate ROBi'RT AIJDfLEL . ........ versus iPBLIC ... \............... £L,JJFC4J .T . .T hAYN, J. - The appeiint ivEtr, convicted in the District Court of Iringa of offonces of burglai' and ot .alin anti was sentenced to a total of two years iprisonmcnt and td receive the t fou: strokes of corporal punishment. He now appeals aainst such conviction to this Court. The charge sets out that\on 17th Septeaber, 1969 the appellant broke and entered the dweiling-hous of one Galus Mintane and stole therefrom one Phi1Li.p r..dio of the value o±\ Shs. io/-, its numb r being 906320. The case for the prosecuton opened with the evidence of the woman Halima Joseph, who told the Coir't that at about 8 p.m. sne was coo:ing food in the kitchen of her house; w}.en it came up to the hour, whe le.'t her work with a view of going to the si'tirig-rocm of her house in order to liaten to the news nulletin, but on axrival thre, she found. that, while he had been in the kitchen, the radio iad been removed from the room and was no to be seen. The front door of1ccordinCly Le houae had been properly closed when she ,was in the rear quartora. he ezL out and reported the loss first to her uusband alnu thereLdter to the Police, giving tIe registered number of -Lo instument which wus imprinted on the frame. Sometime later she told the\ Court that, as a rsult of cnrtain inform'tion which se obtained, h went to a place named Nd..4.1i nd tere found te stolen radio in the posession of a i,ieirl iiamed anl, who is the Village Executive Officer; she icentified the radio both from its apparance and us numbr as that stolen from her house on 17th September* her husband also confirmed the identity of t.46 machine, and produced the receipt for it, i'thich bore tue same numher. Pa.J\tolci. the Caurt that 'tue r.dio had, been brought to him by riicis when Le came in t.ith the acca.sed to the 1-'rimary Court. The second witneoi, was one ncis, who lived in the ca.ile house as the accused and he related, that, some imo during the month of September, 1969, a .Village Executive Officer sent ci informed him tilat the accused had escaped from the Primary Court of simani and was to be sought for. On the 17th september, - that is on th date of' the burglary of the house of the complainant, the witness saw ti b accused at his room and went and informed him at 11 p.m. that night that he it wanted at the Primary Court. He found that the accused had a bundle of cl thos and also a radio and he took hm with the clothes and the radio to the Pr imary Court. Th witness identified the radio which }e saw with the appelia. as that which was produced in Court; it bore the identical number of the tolen instrument, and this was handed over to the Village Executive Orfic eç'. This man J.so gave evidence and displayed 'the radio which bore the s4me number, which was later handed to the Police for formal prudu.ctiou in Court. The accused in hiu. defence, tcld the Court that tue radio which Francis had found with him was not the stolen Iradio at all, but was one of an entirely different make an.,t had been ;iven to him from his l.t,e brother's estate. .. - 2 - He called as his first witness the Primary Court messenger who stated that the accused had asked him to obtain the radio from the Village Executive Officer but that the latter had refused to hand it over to him. Additional evidence was given to tLe effçct that, when the accused was arresed and brought with tue radio to the Primary Court, he calimed the radio to be his property. The trial magistrate examiriea carefull; te whole of the evi'ence before him and particularly considered the evidence as to the identity of the rad.ip he came to the conclusion that it was tne property of the compiainant and not of the accused as t.tie lattar claimed. This Court considers that the evidence before the trial Court leaves no reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused and that tae appeal is without substance. ientence is in accordance with the provisions of the Rinimum Sentences Act. After reading the record this Court is satisfied that the appeal has been louged without any sufficient ground of complaint and I consequently order that it be forthwith summarily rejected. Dar es Salaam. (o. ¶. ItAMLYN) 13th kugust, 1970- JUD1.