19730427 TZHC Mwanza2

...- - ,. .. .; . I ric IT : - CC T ': Zf Ti 1rz, 1FP3L]JTE' JRLSDICTI0N ±iIG CQUT CHI 1 I1\TIL !PF!L 110 16 OF 1972. A. (Origna. Criminal Case Uo. 409 of 1971 of tnc District Court of ]uranga District a t Shinyangp f3oforc - Bidebari sq,, District 111agistrate F}f i'TCIS SH1J . . • . . . . ... . . .. F ]LLi NT VI1RSUS Th1' REPUBLIC . 2. CHRGE Bcing in poscssion of, forged bank notcd nti'ry ............................................... to section 348 of tile PGnal Code, Cap. 16 F I JUDGM)3NT. . J ...................................................... 'L—KBDY, • .- ,. . .°4 . .. . .. . Francis Sliija Wasô , itii and convicted of being in possession of forgedaik nots c9ntrar.to.sc .tin :48 of the Pnal Code Cap. 16"Ic sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years, subject to confirntion b th€ I1ig Court. It ordcrcd •:.thq11egd.d fthgecI not66 to the . destroyed, and the amoant of Shs. 157/10 to be treated as compensation to Joha (PW2) and Jisando (Pw3). apea1cd against conviction, sentence an orders. The lcatrncd S:anthor State Ittorney Mr. Pleola appeared for the Republic. The Tl1ant was present in person. ....... ' H .... ... The only ground of appeal worth considering in this case was whether t-1ged• 6..bankThets 1de procd o ha been forged ones. Like the leaned trial magistrate and the 1eancd Senior State ttornc.y., I find tiat there was ample evidence to show that the appellant was in possession of 6 bank notes (Exhibit s). He gave 4 of them to IYwa1u, one to Johà (P'42) and one to Jisando (PU3).. From Jolia and Jisando, the ap'e1lant ob-tanied cash, as he was changing the alleged notes after buying same items, but Jisando., who was extremely observant., held the appellant and told him tliqt he believed that he purpoted bank note of Sns. iOo/ - all the 6 banks of Shs. ioo/= each - was not a genuine one, and he demanded refund of his money, but the appellant would not. This set the trend which led to the examination of the purpotcd bank notes in possession of Ng'walu,, and Joha. Llthough, in Couit, the appaiJant argued that he was not in possession of any of the 6 bank notes, I find that there was sufficient evidence proving .tht he was in possession of them and, therefore, I find no reason to disturb the finding of fact .in this respect. The appellant argued that in the aoscncc of expert evidence, thcrc, was no proof that the bank notes were forc.ries. He also argued that even if they had bean proved to have .bcen forgeries, thre was no evidence that he knew that they were foTgeries. I agree with this appe-Fant that then was no expert evidence .on record, but this does not, nccc.ssarly follow, that his apoal must succeed. :,s I did not have the exhibit be-nk notes, at the time of arguments in court I sent for the exhibits and now I have the advantage of abserving them. I agree. with th.e trial magistrate that they are forgeries. It was a matter or, surprise that Ng'walu and Joha had not seen how unlike they were with the genuine hank notes of Sbs. iflO/ ±ich . . . .. • I 41 c_I are issued b,,r the Bank o Danzaiia. L mere- casual examination reveled their stat T.hpuor.ted: >ilotograpll of his Bxcellency, the President, is very much unlike him, he puported Court of 2'.rms hai3 ho.cscldrce o.he:rehl one. Ei.enhe words BLNK OF T.NZLNIL: ' are shaky :,ncl unfitting. 3vcn the red colour is not impressive. It is red and of rod biro but it does not f±I1 inivoio1y. :Ia1it..curnstances,thc-rofore the .,.p;;..& icteswbul not - pa. asgenuina bn'nk ' noies to an abservant eye and one dosnDthdd ±ipc-rtto se-c all these abvious features. It is the du.t - of he trial court to make findings of facts and exper -t's evidence is only meant to sist the court in adhin its .decsion,' I find load expert evidence on the 6 benk notes was not fatal to the conviction. Lnd on. the- hasi dfthe evidence I find tnat the appellant know tht tii banknotes he hd, in his..posossioh, war fafhs. e had cc hane- on - o 'Jrsano alid obtainad cash, and, almost immediately, at the same promises he c-zchanged another one to Joha and obtained cash. If he did not knpw of ticir true nt.ure, he wcul4...not have repea'd:.:.. thai act almost irrnccdiptcl3 . If h s exchange qps genuine, and he had alr'eady oota'incd cash from 5isondo t he would not - have repeated the - ct on Jolla.. J..e exchanged the note-s at night time at a pombc club H nas taking advantage of the night and of tho fact that tkio fthc loquor club would probably the too drunk to ahseTve the bank notes he was giiin..thërñ-.J..h .s a result I find that the appeal against conviction has no merit, and it is disnssed,. . . ;. . . . .... In my view the sntencc of three years is well deserved. The offence- is ver serious. I. confirm the- selitcice imposed. The two ordcr g. made- on fully justifcd. 4 - F Order. his appeordismscd inoto. Delivered in court at Lwanza on the 27th dy of Lpril, 1973 .1 ...................... ::: ........ . - Z.N £LJtJDG Jppe1lant - absent £ - Mr, Mbilinyi - State ttoTnc3r, for Republic 4- ri - -3. 4 $ .3 $