19730804 TZHC Mwanza2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZNL T MW4NZJ HIGH COURT C1UMILAL APPJL No. 243 OF 1972 Original Criminal Case No. 693 of 1972 of the District Court if Kigoma District at Kigoma - Before H.E.D. Sisya, Esq., S.R.M. RAMADJ{ANIs/oSEFU .............................. .PPELLANT versus THE REPUIBLIC .............. .................... . . . . IjSPONDENT CILARGE: Cattle theft c/es 268 and 265 of the Penal Code. SUMMJRY RJ1iCTION : IKINDT, J.: Ramacihani s/o Sefu was charged with and conicted of cattle theft contrary to section 265 and 268 of the Penal Codeç and sentenced to the minimum term of imprisonment of five years as per Section 5 (o) of the Minimum Sentences ict, 1972. The trial court found that in the morning of the 21st of November, 1972, the appellant was found in the act of strangling a pregnant goat which was the property of Haruna Barangwa. Haruna had tied this goat to graze, but he found it missing. When he was searching for it, he heard groaning noise coming from somewhere, and he claimed that it was a noise being made by a goat. When he proceeded to the spot, he found the appel- lant sitting on his goat, and he was holding the mouth and the throat of it to prevent it from breathing. The appellant abandoned the goat and took to heels, but he was chased by Haruna and others who joined Haruna, and he was recovered as he hid in a bush. He was arrested. The appellant denied the allegations of facts as given, in evidence, by the witnesses for the prosecution, but the trial court accepted these facts and found the appellant guilty as charged. The petition for appeal, though not in such clear words, contends that the learned trial magistrate misdirected himself when he accepted the evidence of the prosecution, and he disputed every finding of fact made. Having regard to the evidence on record, the trial magistrate was entitled to accept the evidence which, if accepted, left no reasonable doubt as to the guilty of the appellant. I find that the petition for appeal does not raise sufficient cause for complaint against convicti.n. The sentence imposed is the minimum pr.vided for in such cases. This appeal le and is hereby summarily rejected. Z. N. E DY 4th august, 1973. JUDGE