19710421 TZHC Dar es salaam2

I,. r rjj' Q-i 4 Crinini i.pci 700 nt3 769 of 1C?i. 1irz.t Cri1ni. (zz to. 07 of iCO - of tho i1itDiot (otrt of ic3rTo DL't'ict at Eic1rcza O1QrC D. L. r2iar, 2ic. T1crict ctrcto RfV2I 0/0 JL1b4. IIr o/o Li11 ) (1 in1 ccncd • ::- o1fl2) VWC • c'- n - rT • .-_J (Oi1 inL roicutor) Conat3 1 : iorcry cntr to ccctiorn 3i3, 3135 (cs) rrü 337 of tho tini CoCo, p. 10 Vol. I oft!ok Counto 2 0 £3 - tzz1ic Ly cUTc!x1t controry • afl 0: to ccotiic CCZ3 en'J J71 of • • the nc1 .3cz4 - 6 tttrti2Z cQ1C ccnto o 71 catrcry t ccotio!1 5'12 of • - the ic]. Loo. • Cut ctcnittcd cn Cotriit 0. • orrci trith a th11 tin, tiiio o cecalUtca., on tt-o •' cowta of tbrco couatc. of utcr2 a i1co cmwmt v , cmd to couato of otc1iu ty crt 'cro • -cnv1otc1, c On oc covit of ctLj cnd tt Gtkr c1 oo count of cc'y ci.ü- oo czzit of ctca13.. and they • • cc cc to k7iizonmat iox thzcc cro, :1 '- tch crricd titt it t cttuto -zrd o tt.ctr fo' ct'000 i'prc1 11Z21t On tI CQCVICt ion cr tcali, cnfl tho c ,Urat, vho co a2co cnvC.ctci thoi'1'Y ctcic O ti!t co1ct1on to iroxrt for a to iun coicrronil ?ith the oticr ccntcico of rz2cy rrc no • - • aiipcnIkigr c their ci:air cm corrno1±otcU. :Ln thio - -. jfltznt Z ii ctni the &ecriptioro of all t1rco. rn • b her, and he subsequently brought her s. 4W45 togethcr v..ith a receipt, which,, however, she had lost. Ps noted, evidence as given that the receipt made out by the secoi.d accused for the pm"chase from Idcii Iriwana was for ,49O kilograms of rice, the price of which., accordiug to the evidcnce wouiJI be Ss. 1 1 309/50. iCC rdi.nc, to the evidence of the witnesses referred to above, all that Iddi wana received was •:. 43/45, therefore, if that evidence is accepted, it estblithes that the second accused 1'.rged the receipt he gave to Iddi Mbwana and c.cfrauded the society of s, 1,326/5, which sum, as lie was charged with stealing. The second accused's unsworn statement in his dcfence can also be set out in fu!l. It reads - 'The oomLnittee of the RUVu Farniers Go -operative Society employed inc as an assistant secretary to the society. It was for the conrittee to 1e'd nie in my day to day duties, the committee being n employer. The coimrtittee is the only body which could instruct me on what to do. I cannot go against this body's instructions. I have served the aociety sincc1964to1969 This isity defence . ith respect, 1 fully agree i7ith learned state Attorney that the evidence adduced fully supports the convictions of the second accused for forgery and stealing •s. 1,326/0b, the property of the 3ociety. ith regard to the sentences inposc g V although they exceed the çrescribed minimum by one year, as re-peatedly stated, the minimum sentence is not by any means necessarily the standard one. In all the circumstances of the case I do not consider that this Coit would be justified in interfering with the sentences inposed on the two appellants. .oth appeals are acoordiugly dismissed and the sentences, which require confirmation by this Coiwt, are i;creby confirmed. )elivered in Goi't at Dar es 3aiaam this 213t day of pril, 1.071. (Sgd.) PHILIP BIRON. JUDG1.