19721211 TZHC Mwanza

ns Sci t!) 7T 9OUpTA 0%j o. upX -o pit 'p41T0 £tj. cs .ticIcT joTJT rT io - S l O qm mllT prn b. eqr ow q ppoM t •u.cttrno..rr otfl. Uj trds t1"L qolwA &OTT MQJS O j ou €t esocLntd çir ptrx pip t!cT t t R.91107TTV 'root 'JOq r ' TT P tJdQJCT'tW UM12..Zp q qt21w uoistouo o o tt IT ptn rpuedx •X)AO OUAO1 JO 6 AJV ;t 'ssex xo; oco o. Dtrnb.x q u -- T TTp'noq u v TT 5 ) dCe 07LT, Tu n ds utow ot JLJO T41 UO pt?t TtiAJ Tv T OT PU2tT ouo auT uo motTS 0. S4 T T 0; rtrc i; .xo socnd str; JOJ 1.ueds Topj Ut tP' T40nul iiot MOtZ o. prtpp uptA oti si t; 'suet; uo cTwx .zoj '1s0xnd tons tic Sc um wos weds .ot; Ut pp pu sod.tM fItT y,j .xoJ iVetrottr q; pueds a; t.xot;rte pq ;ucTd 09UO0 St 1-! JttttM ;rig poeijoo C flUCAJ tiOTtil! M01 SMOtIS JTCW 0t!9ptA tbOttiOe0Jd IMTL ' po;oT -p -c a;uoo ;ou seM ootT9pTAq 9 TLljl ;ueted z'tt; tO(cts o; s;tto jo w.xot - ,tTT uT redd Atitpxo psrt t-rew Lot1; Ltt'r oro ;uewtd 011 pet iVt ooq teo ;ou pip (uo t; tictt jo) oec tpu.tq p;;s ewt; tt!! eelr nqT Ut RNTI. JO3 ejoc CAT CT OtS.stçr SEM OtIt4 i1 SptOOi eti; ut pe;oe';ox ;ou se)4 CJntpUedxe tT o na 9 uld -e-00q pq jo rieoeq nAv stu-c el o ST4 se sesctnd oj Seuow aTI T EAU 'ew ;tnItCdd et; ;eq. eqtssocT si ;r ;rq. p iwqs eqwng 'jjq gnt.j, icT.tedoxd .Ou 3XCM pru SSCtU t Ut CICM ttt10 uecd ;ti; % Mep j A p otpe.x;uootrn st eteqj, 'UOitAUoo tfl. ;.XQCJCITIS 0; otx pip Tqfldt Ctil. .xoj utce .x qwe;t todcT 't; jO ut.xiet ; ; Ct; ptn;ez 0; p9woxd pu 'sodnd tuo tt .toj iViuow ueds AeT a; pCiwpe ;wetTdd tj; ttqi ut ;uItdd t; q u;t TPCTTC U9Op 110 0- t •sTew CTTJ, sesodind flIJ JOJ tCLU CACT 0. PCJJTe etr totTM UCWIed oqt jo od6 is ut OlS qO n C USU1 9 P(l onpo.d uT pitei oo ouow tj; eto;s ut1CcT OtIT ;; pt 2CAO F. 0tj eei;siew tTLL 'tzC.XCJtxo twu oLz;tp 2u1pue140 2eep rotre.iq 04 seoueo e xe;sqrs ptxe sxej jo quewiecT put Suot;e.xqeTo Pq'ep eeC PV T pTo 7q go ;soO et *.eW a; ;tiemd I se t[OTtS 'eU0Ut WOJJ sintpuecixe ;oe; flYJ. uteq.eC a; Cq; 5utttibei exoqej. Ut flJtI J° 1°T1-S(T P' reuoTo,T etfl WOJJ sjeT;aT IflOJ eotiep!Ae ut ;nd ueItecTd tn ouCptA t; Aq e;.roddns 91T'; CM &LITPUT; stj sesodncT t1NT 110 9euow flfl pueds o; t;t.Iot(;rw petf ;ueTtecii2 :t; ;eq; ptrnoj et;strnu tetJ; PT2JeC'[ etjj ssod.rnd nKy LT, .xo; ii t ;ueds q i?etutplo ;riq iVuo t; pteo.x et a; pe;;twp Cou;Cp stt Ut titL CUOtfl sttfl ;!xeIIedde et; ren peeTTe txot;nosod Ij JO ous ITReo C T.4tl4 pU1QJ 9M CtT C.XO 5Ufl000C pUC T j SvQ Stt tTCt flf\T1J JO JTPT4 0 CL UO CfltIPAC.X JO UOt;COO teDrrtotit stt pue CIOcC Ut oCeeeTCu.TI 10 9 ;eoes toue.xq se flJ iq voIcTw st ;tteTTddC et. ;et; se uoç;noeso.td so CQtItie9 puC TIO TT OTAtToo et; TSuTePV PCtCCCJdC ou ;uwqstund '(CXOdJO JO s)tQs 7j siid ;UettftzOstsdmt • f pCoU4tzCs 5C14 T12 COO IUe-T ti1 30 ç9 ptlC TL o; t;uoo !~ VI P A X ST icq &TT(rC; JO pe; TAU00 qL5M cprItçr icTo;trt ;uCTtedde 91 d3 ?P00 TCU9d T- JO tLZ ptxe ç9 ss/o ;txA.xec cq •uee;c (.?o;rIoesoJd T!TJo) tOd0i * • Indr IfljJ, (pesnoo 1CUt 5 TJO) ITTddV I(TfIVCt 0/s JHdOiLI 1 I0 1JTJ, IDV JTI J IJIdII r - i,reTQr JT JOI 1LTOICr OJJ. JO JHflOO JOI?TIT JW JO 6961 'Ot TO TJINI?JC T1iIOIHO L/6T ON CICF IT.IO JJTflOO JJDIH NOI]OICflTftC LTInIddV tilv INZi' L1O iunc rwiH - rO) rr) Af 3W• 4 It$ 'j .' i v - ty • j. • fl7 '4 JC . .' 1 'T.i •... 'T7 L'13fl' p rTt-.M: ; .' • 1 '4L 0 t'' t' b - ty.ç o ro2J .r:' J)rç- V' 4C yrj -;.ç .OTJ.i • 'II In u .:7 TP r 11 y-:c i:. ..T 1. Ii T3 :;i.1 ')CO m &: 'T J•:3.e JY ' .. . . o ''' M• YL 7_(S. r- .'•' •( ..•. T1 tT .''..' n. t' 7C, -,'f T3 ? T pOC.c. .T("r 1' '••- r O W 7. Aft i;tflAt ¶! '1' I • -" r. :U ':. itiT? - L4 1 ±. •m• •': Y' . T'. .,f•' [' fl . , Jt -•' •-.r----- ; - ci: : r. :. .1:, : t: I lig •• S .;••....... :. '.•• :"T,U? • • J )'.f •-- - - -•' 1 j : 1. 2I i:y •r'.: y . :- E.;' ,r",1 :: :..• •Ij rr:.bo7 T IT ' ;' :ITTT •-' 1r f..• J-. L(i!.r" ;.'ll: : •7•. - 0 :lr •3 C? ;I r. 117T' .'IT 'N c-: : y - . • ryr r1 ti -. U: ¶,4 •-'...) :' : ) C.' •-" t':r 4 chits of pper LUi1 0 tIC ?Cje3. 1tIOLih tI a 1)pellant did not pro.uce any such chits this is not by itself conclusive that he miSappropri ated the money beceuse it is posaibla that he 1A1:J 11Z., ve. spent the .mozey on Th.NU purposas but bec.use of bad accounting p20cohurC the racord such. expenditure is not shown. ain P0.1,2 stated tia the appellant did not maintain any cash box. o that CVCIi i the ap1ant did make out chits against payments, such cics coulu esily cc 1is)1QcCL or lost espeoialy considering that they derc in a loosa form not bound in a book and thce was no secure place 9 such as a cash box, in t.o keep tham. .. Futherthore the money alleged to be stolen is shown to have ceen oàileted over a paribu xtendin from 1967 to 1969. Thus any chits made out in support of paymnto during this period c,oulu have en mip1acau or lost conajdarin the. length of time involved and considering that thz'e was no secure place to keep such loose chits of paper. j.S stated before, tha laarnad trial magistrtc, in con,v•ictiny the appellant, also reliod on a aoournent a1leed1y .7rittan by the appellant in which the appellant admits to hac used the mone for his on pupo,ses.. At the trial, however, the appallant claimed that be as forced by ona Lumwnea .(P.4.2) to make the admission. P,,.2 aas the I'dC district, executive secretary and therefor.e a superio' officer of apallant.. The lcarneu trial magistrate founc. that, P. .02 to whom the confession s macic was a person on authority but held that coflfioi so uc.' was acLinissib1 unctar ..c ic i 29 of th videnee tot on the grouna that in his opinion tie confession voluntary and was not in any way inu.uocd or axtortaci y It would a:)- ear, from the uvidno,e that. the leed trial maistrata was entitled to ccine to that conclusion, but tha .atter did not, and as stated earlier, the appellant at th trial retracted the confession b,' claimjn that ha was foacci by 10 .1.2 to make it, M. Butarnbala contended that in the circumstances tha. confession required to be corroborated before it could be acted upon,. T.h.q Court of ippeal in the case of Th.warn&v.Uganda. 1967' A. 84 iid. aown that wher a confession ias been repuciat or"rtratcci the cou'b should accept suoh confession iti eeutio. and iiust be sts,fiad that c.onsideriiig. all the circumstances tlie confession. is tue. The Court wnt on to say that': usually. a cot.rt will accpt the con siox if it is corroborat a Iii sorii material prti,cul.rs but if aftei': consiciarieg all th material points and surrouneing circumstances the Cor,t i; fly satisfied that the confession cannot 'but. be tr,ue, then, the court, can accept ant act on the confession aloxa evaz tough there is 119 . eV1ci.floe to, dorrobora'te it., In the present case the learned trial rnagstrat .J,'d not, consider. the issue of corro'boratio ecause, it would appear, he satisfied that the confess-. ioi as true. 4 Indeeç onde th c-videnc of tile all cash sortge is discounted than there is, no other ev,idence to corroborate the confession, So that. even if the tr,il magistrate tried to looc for such corroboration I an satisfied that ha wo'uld finc none Ph., lmmLctlatL qusti.on to consider is whether., in all the circums tanc of the case the confess ion. o-oulct not' but' be true. I : i1ae poin'ed out, earlier that tha proscuti'ohav,e soceoded oi'y in'h1,how much revanu.. the appe1lan collected over the period ...xtendin,, froroj,,967 to 1969z. but. whi1e it was concedea tnat th appellant had authority tp, and did in fact, use. r.evonu. for ThU purposes, it1. . ras not. shownho.mtc'h he ha spent. f6r such T,'NiJ purposes. Inea,'he was. charged with stealing, the entire amount, of rev.nue col'1c.o,t,ed ov,ei' the period aX,tendin 1967: 4 l'969, and thd alleged ccssion purpor,t to be his admipsioi to have stolen that sum 0 One it be conceded, that the appellant spent soma money o ThNU. purposes then it is ithoasibl to. say that the. appellant. st 'tie entire arnunt of revenue ha call ec,ed. Consequently the alleged eoif.esio.n that the appellant stole th a id of% r,vziu he collected cannot, be true because if" it ware true then he wo'd, hav no rev-nuo at all to usa o1.TANU:purposos This in. roy opiionthe. tpt, as laio down in Tuwazroi case ci,tcj above was not satisfied an's. therefore the con.fass.ion ought.. iot to., have been accepted. Iftie confessioii ip thus excluá.el tnan.,tber.. is n,o other ey.dence. implicating' the 3ppl1ant n,tn the offence cna1c and the appal ought to S1c.eud ? AO.ç,ordin1y the cow..ctipn. i,, quashed an,U sente±ic, set, aaid, 3. nd t1i3 3)p€11nt is to be ce1ccL anl.cso othciis. laidully h1u jt, Ou-3tdy.. 2 11th Denibr 9 1972, (- H iiSALGA)