19830801 TZHC Mbeya1

pTJe SJTT OU OUOH )t OT ts EA ? R La nT 'I oo'rstts zet{ OA (eo q.ou) otze ox.xoq puD o..oqparo qtlq ErJTq U14 .IT4 DL JOUOL'J Aq q.OU pyp OTS pTVS 'qtrntTT1cTDOO •. Ito TILIS T tTOUM 'ss)uqM PSTPUTJ sc i cIth ot ç oq. g • pno =/ 000 'st rs PT'cd eis ji iqq. ssouq.p trq. oq. Peo' °H 'q..xno UT TJeIO U14 ' TTcrd )tfl q.orJ puv id't - qq. noqia ttri.bu- oq. qxno •.' C .* oxqsr etq o. eruo () ucj orrn poo tro ip ouj • 6L/L 'o V3eJth' UTiTT.I3 'iSoqj JO TanOD otqSrçr 014 OL pood pui3 qxnoo £xuir.xt upqxoo q peuosTtc.:rç uoq p 'eu ur[vuoç p - tio tr.r 1 1?Lfl. SIA toq.s 01TIr •uç- c dh 2uirt .xoJ=/oojstrs joao; . pefl.p.U0 se uto.xrot icq (EM) OCUOr uouo roxj st /oots uqo or s q.ç (q.unoo aqq. oq. te - UT) • 14TOJ UT Ptr, q.UT1 U Th ...Txp oq. qUoi'iOnpUT uu si oJc.uoqrr UOCUtj3f =/oors UTI4qO O. pEct1oq Jcq .111.100 0L[ TMIT DU2.1qC £!!. T 11.U0 P.ITt oTfl U] 0SOd.Iflt tU2S pU1 ( !1S[) UOSI1 0tTS E)4 • 7jO.1J /OC9T° P)AT't@Lf PU0 ëq. .11:1 6L/Lot TPa dd77 1UTtJT.13 ,o 2UT.1U- L{ Tt fl .3E1d 0. .U9 Ot1UTU s ( '.-j) tr .,OTtl:rru ouo luOJJ /000'srs poor - cE pt..zo stL i qJrnoo is.rç; et[q. ui: TuaDe W q SUOTOIUq. 11ZtO0 JO S1tO0 0t1.fl tflTL'L peto Slbk odcriE et •.• . :f 'vgt.xtn • ...... 9rc3 '0P03 U0J eT.{q. o icj px ./o SOÔUOeJ ouj i JeuocI Lrp4o oq. :q.txno3 L117 1t6i JO 90 uoq4nx.xo3 JO u0p.uoAtetq. ;o (U) () (f) 's/o 'q.ueh Aq UOT10USuD d1UJ03 0flTH3 sqo ............ SflSA LT.tIaW ........'...'..., iI!t f • ' T5UU 'OJJOS H : Ily :OP'ISI(I do minoo iorscr qlq4, iSi ±io 61C 'oi aa rtImiio Iino 6i o 06 oi rprjnr gIT coqi) - - . . .. I0IO IS VXJET J • ViD1VJr.17 Mrj, tW IIflCO P10111I11 MI 861NV1 61 i)4' s;4# . •.•••. I (2) counts, As for the third and fourth count, it was in evidence that Johnson Mwatongoro (Pi.4) had his coL1laint investigated by the Police. Finally the Police told hiu that his complaint was a civil matter and advised him to come to the District Court, There he met the appellant who offered to draw up a plaint on payment of Shs.400/=. The complainant (Pi.4) P. him the money. Later a row arose between the two men and no plaint was drawn up. In his defence the appellant denied to have any dealings alleged by the two complainants (P'.2 and N.4) but he was convicted of the first three counts and sentenced to 3 years each count, to ran concurre- ntly. He appealed to this court. kr. Dhebar argued the appeal. I start with the first two counts. The only evidence which tended to incriminate the appellant was that of Tan'iile Sanga (F1'I.2). She said that the appellant daanded Shs.2,000/= in order to speed up her relativetg apjeal. She was unable to raise that sum but managed to get Shs.1,600/.= from her father (not called). She gave the sume to the appellant. As far as I know the normal practice in this kind of corruption is for the iic*im of the solicitation to rupoit to thb, authoiity, which in ttrn 3 would arrange a trap to batch the culprit ledhaded with the trap money. This was no't' dont and no complaiirit moiey-w found- with the appellant. - It was dngous f the trial' magistrate 4tor4l.y on the oplaivts onl-y testimony that Ishe, gave hin the- !:ony With regard to the third count it' wag -alleged that the appellan't coriptly domdd Sh'.4OO ;/= from the themlainant (P.-4) d an induceueit to wr±te"the piaint. ' Let ione. th'fao't that there was 'no eviaenc to- siport such 'an allc:aticn, the: tansaction"itsëlfdould 'not be called -'corrut.-- Th judiciary has no ohligatons 'to draw'laints for litigants. Judiciary , -Staff 'are always advised -to k'iep out of' those exercises. If however Ae ap-peiln-trced Eo -wite'-the-coatplainarit"s plaint, this -wa óutsie ;udiciary sphere of operatIon It :*as a privtagnen't. 'The appell'nt could not be said 1'ie waa&ting in elatin to the affdirs of his priaaipal. - I allow, the appal, quash the appellant's cony icn' on1l-c6urLts, set aside:'the serteiices nd &rder that the aPpellant b- set' at- -liey f.crthwith :W'i38 held foi othercausês.' , JuDGE'. ' :!' '•'