19720908 TZHC Arusha2

"5 IN The HIGH CLW?LT CF TANZALIA Al llLSHl APPELLATA JURISLIC'iICN HIGH COURT CR1. :L!AL A 1 hAL l(.. 194 of 1972 c/F C.R. LIP. 195 of 1972 CRIGINAL CR. 0i-SJi NC. 156 of 1972 OF THE DISiT1CI CCURT OF SAME DI RIC± PARE Before C0 H. IVisemati E.q., -- --------------------------- District Magistrate 10 ORUTU S/C NYAKUTENGA ----------------- 1 st Appellant ----------- JUaA b1b RANADHANI ----------------------------2nd Appellant (Original Accuseds) versus THE REPUh IC --------------------------------------------- Respondent (Original Prosecutor), CHARGE Robbery witii violence c/s 285 and 280 of tac Penal Code. 20 :ru H G H B N T Brambl. ' The two appellant were charged jointly with the offence of robbery with violence contrary to secticns 285 and 265 of the Penal Code. They were oonvic+ed and given the minimum sent.enoe The complaint 9 P.W l ? testificd +hat. the ap,.eilarits orderdd her into their huse. The first appellant threw her down, cat her neck 40 beads 9 tore her gown and removed shs. 500/— wuich she had ue - der her brassiere. They also too1: away a pair of sandals. She raised an alarm and two people came to her assistance. One of tnem, P.W. 2 gave evidence that when he went to the scene he saw the first appellant sitting on the complainant; tue second appellant rae away with a pair of sandals and a piece of cloth. The complainant was takeat othe police station. The Police Officer accompanied F.K 1 to the house of the accus.d persons about six days after where they recovered a pair of sandals and a piece of cloth which was identified by F.W 1. The incident was alleg I to have 50 taken place at about 6.30 p.m on the 9th May 9 1972. All appellant No. 1 said was that he found the cotnplaiiiant ' drinking with P.N 2, the second ap)ellant, and another prson at a bar at 6.30 p.m He lelt appellant No. 2 who was abnormal but cot quite drunk at about 9.30 p.m. They did not live together. He did not answer the allegations made ag aint hi.ts Appellant No. 2 said -th&.t -the complainant was his concubine; they drank beer up to 9.00 p.m and tLey went to his home where they slept. 60 The complainant asked f or money the following morning and went away leaving the sandals and cloth behind. He claimed that the complainant was telling lies because he did not give her money His witness said that he saw them drinking together and tiiy left at 6.00 p.m. After the trial magistrote examined the evidence he found that the prosecution story was true and did not believe the appellants. There was enough on the record to justify his decision. The appellants were proved to be acting together and 1 uphold the convicticns. The sentence is the minimum prescribed by law and 1 dismiss the appeals. Delivered in Court at Arasha the 8th day of Septemb r, 1972. 7, 1. C.E. Bramble, T TT 15 ! T /Kimath:i.