19840807 TZCA Arusha

- - .4 i IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT ARUSHA (CORAM: Mustafa, J0A, Makame, J.A. and Kisanga, J,A0 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO0 21 OF 1984 B E T W E E N UPENDO MJEMA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... APPELLANT A N D THEREPUBLIC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RESPONDENT (Appeal from the conviction of the High Court of Tanzania at Arusha) (Chua, J. dated the 3rd day of April, 1984 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT MUSTAA, J 0A : The appellant was convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to five years' imprisonment0 The appellant was the wife of one Mjema and who was in the process of being divorced by her0 Mjema was at the material time living with p0W01 Martha, with whom he had a child0 The prosecution evidence was to the effect that on 4th January, 1980, at about 600 p0m0 the appellant went to the house of POWOI. Martha, and there the appellant took out a pistol from her bag, aimed at POW.1 Martha at the chest and fired0 P0W 0 1 Martha managed to deflect the shot which however hit her on the thigh, injuring P.W.I.The appellant did not deny the firing but alleged that the shot was fired accidentally when POWO1 Martha was struggling with her for possession of ' the pistol0 The trial judge considered the evidence adduced by the prosecution and the defence0 He accepéd the prosecution evidence, S S 4 which if believed, would establish the offence of attempted murder0 He rejected the defence of accidental shooting0 The whole issue in this appeal was on facts, on whether the trial judge was entitled to accept the facts as adduced by the prosecution in the circumstances0 We have Ourselves carefully gone through the evidence and we are satisfied that the trial judge was quite justified in coming to the conclusion he did0 We find no misdirection either on law or on the facts0 The trial judge drew th. proper inferences from the facts and was right to have concluded that the appellant had attempted to kill POWO1 Martha by shooting at her0 Mr0 Jonathan has argued the appeal with great diligence, and has put forward all possibi grounds favourable to the appellant0 We have considered his arguments, but are not persuaded that any of his grounds raises a doubt as to the validi€y and correctness of the trial judge's conclusion0 As regards sentence, the trial judge had dealt with all the mitigating circumstances before he passed sentence0 We cannQt say that he had erred in any way and we do not think we should interfere. '. S The appl is disrnissd in its cntirety0 - 'S • S - DATED at ARUSHA this 7th ;day of August, 1984 : • - A. US.TAFA - .' JUSTICE OF APPEAL S / - L. M. MAK-JE JSTICE OF APPEAL -.--- 'L i R. H. KISANGA • JUSTItE OF APPEAL C , • I cirtify that ths i is a true co,py of the original0 k L. A A. KAND 0. ..; ------ç5 ' DEPUTY REGISTRAR