ramadhani nuru vs republic 1986 tzca 37 22 july 1986

IN THE COURT OP APPEAL OP TANZANIA AT ARUSHA CORAM: MUSTAFA., J . A . ; MAKAME, J.A . And OMAR, J . A . CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 82 OP 19 85 RAMiiDHANI MJRU. .................................... APPELLANT VERSUS - THE REPUBLIC. . .................................. RESPONDENT ( A p p e a l fr om t h e c o n v i c t i o n o f the High Court o f T a n z a n i a a t A rusha) ( D'Souza, A g. J .) d a t e d t h e 2 9 t h day o f February, 1984 in t r i m i n a l A p p e a l No. 92 o f 1983 JUDGEMENT OP THE COURT MUSTAFA, J . A . : There was a r o b b e r y a t n i g h t in which i t was alleged t h a t 15 p e r s o n s t o o k p a r t . During the r o b b e r y violen ce was u s e d on t h e i n m a t e s o f t h e b u i l d i n g where the ro b b e ry took p l a c e . Some o f t h e r o b b e r s were armed w i t h hand g u n s . S e v e r a l i n m a t e s i n t h e b u i l d i n g had t o hand o v e r cash to the r o b b e r s . Eleven o f the a l l e g e d r o b b e r s w er e a r r e s t e d and c h a r g e d b e f o r e a D i s t r i c t Court. The tria l court convicted 5 o f them and a c q u i t t e d t h e o t h e r 6. The f i v e c o n v i c t e d were A c c u s e d 4, A c c u s e d 5, Accused .. t A c c u s e d 9 and A c c u s e d 11 a t t h e t r i a l . The c o n v i c t e d p e r s o n s were s e n t up t o t h e High Court f * r sentence. In t h e meantime a l l the 5 appealed a g a in st t h e i r c o n v i c t i o n . The High Court h e a r d t h e a p p e a l s , and a l l o w e d t h e ap p eals o f three a p p e lla n ts , bu t d i s m i s s e d t h e a p p e a l s o f tw* e f them. Among t h e u n s u c c e s s f u l a p p e l l a n t s was the p r e s e n t a p p e lla n t b e f o r e u s , who was A c c u s e d 9 a t t h e - 2 - tria l. The High Court s e n t e n c e d t h e p r e s e n t a p p e l l a n t t o 12 y e a r s im p r is o n m e n t and made t h e u s u a l c o m p e n s a t i o n o r d e r . This i s a s e c o n d a p p e a l and t h e a p p e l l a n t a p p e a l e d t * u s on p u r e l y q u e s t i o n s o f f a c t . No l e g a l p o i n t h a s b een urged before u s. Mr. Mwale f o r the a p p e ll a n t has a t t a c k e * the con viction on t h e issu e o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . In o u r view i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is a matter o f f a c t , and t h e r e certain ly was e v i d e n c e ad du ce d a t t h e t r i a l t o ju stify th e co n c u r r e n t f i n d i n g s o f the c o u r t s below th at the a p p e lla n t was i d e n t i f i e d as one o f th e r o b b e r s on t h e m a t e r i a l n i g h t . The s e n t e n c e i s certain ly severe, b u t t h e n t h i s was a r o b b e r y a t n i g h t w i t h i n a b u i l d i n g i n w h ic h v i o l e n c e was u s e d and i n j u r i e s in flicted and some r o b b e r s were armed w ith guns. In a l l t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s we d i s m i s s t h e a p p e a l i n i t s en tirety. DATED a t ARUSHA t h i s 22nd day c f J u l y , 1986. A. MUSTAFA JUSTICE 0E APPEAL L . M. MAKAME JUSTICE OF APPEAL A. M. A. OMaR j p s t i ; ; j OF APPEAL I c e r t i f y that t h is is a true copy o f the o r i g i n a l . (J . H. MSOFFE) DEPUTY REGISTRAR.