ramadhani hassani vs republic 1987 tzca 42 12 october 1987

IiJ TIIE C'OUiiT OJd APPEAL CA lAPA/U^lA AT AAAAA ( CORAM£ OKAHa J .A . . AAA ILA, Ag. And. MPIGAAO 9 Ag. J,A .) OPIMAML APPALL lie. 73 OP 1986 A ‘ v — :I iiAASAEE..................APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC...................... .RESPONDENT (Appellant iron the conviction of the Ei/ch Court of Tanzania a1 (3 i»/ a » J .) dated the 19th day of September,, 1986 in Criminal Aegsicris Case Aov $4 1985 OP a!!:;’ CCAAT MFALILA, Ag. J.A.- The appellant IPAAjAAA'1 LlAAAA'A'. vre charged with and. convicted, of the murder of hit wife IIAAAPS AAIAJAIAl in the* Jii£h Court Sittin g at Eorogwe (s is y a , J*) end was tH.Vitonced to death. He appealded. against both convictj.cn and sentence. The prosecution esse against the appellant which he denied, was that he atratclcu his wife the deceased as they were going to v i s i t her uncle at a v illa g e called Pongwe. lie then l e f t her lying dead in a va lley . The body was recovered the folloxiring da/. At the t r i a l in the: Pigh Court,, the prosecution l.:d evidence in three stages a ll designed to link t h ; appellant to hie w ife 's death. The evidence in the fir s t sta-Te showed that e l l was net well between the appellant end the deceased., -hat there wore severe 1 constant vio len t quarrels between then end that in the orarcc of one of these quarrels, he threatened to k i l l the deceased. This evidence was given by the deceased13 brother or cousin Kohaaed Iliyamba (p.V/.l) a young boy who was at the time liv in g with the couple in his parents' house. Luring the la st of these quarrelc, tne appellant haa. ft the house end .-rone to Chanika. •The second stage was designed o show that the appellant was the last person tc be seen with the deceased before she died. This evidence was given by the deceased's ► brother Hassan I'iwinjuaa (? .’•/. 2). He odd that ot the request of the deceased’ s mother, he agreed to take the aeceased and ner husbana to Pongwe fo r the purpose cf introducing them to the deceased’ s uncle whom they had never net since th eir marriage. But he said that since he had __ /2 , 2 a. b ic y c le and the two were walking, he went ahead o f them but he took with him t h e i r marriage c e r t i f i c a t e which he intended t o show to t h e i r uncle. He was surprised when the two had not. a n i v e d bv the fo llo w in g day. The thix-d stage con.'.isted o f the a p p e lla n t's own admission which he'made to his uncle Hasoan Hashid P . e . r . P .1 ./. 3 to ld the t r i a l court that a day or two a f t e r the discovery o f his w ix e ‘ s body, the appellant went to him and to ld him in answer to his question that i t was he who had k i l l e d his w ife because o f the constant quarrels between them. He went on to t e l l him that on the day in question, they wece going to Pongwe when they quarreled and he k i l l e d her. On hearing i h i s 5 P.W .3 told, him to go and rep ort the incident at the P o lic e s ta tio n without w a itin g u n t i l P o lic e themselves got hi;.% In his defence thu appellant denied a l l these a lle g a t io n s saying that they were fabrications,, lie denied that h ? had constant quarrels w ith his wif;. the dec cased, lithough he rd_'.it tf.-d th'rb lie had been in the deceased's company on t h e ir way to Pongvc^ he denied that he ted stran gled her or that he had admitted the i'-cct to hie uncle P.W.3. These fa b r ic a tio n s by . . he -caids were ponpted by his d e s ire to revenge his e a r l i e r r e f u s a l t e o f f i c i a t e a t ain c h i l d ' 3 fu neral ceremony. There is no p o s s i b i l i t y that P.VJ, 1 and 3 could have met 1 0 synchronise t h e i r s t o r ie s and y e t what P.h.3 said the appellant t o l d him t a l l i e d w ith what p.V/,1 told the Court about the constant quarrels between the appellant anc the accessed. Like the learned judge and the gentlemen a s s e s s o r s v e leave not been able to fin d any reason which could, make P.W.3 fa b r ic a t e such a serious admission against his nephew as we agree w ith the judge th a t the reason given by the appe1Jant f o r th is f a b r ic a t io n is not worthy o f consideration. Likewise the a p p e lla n t’ s a l l e g a t i o n that the deceased disappeared without any trace ce she branched o f f to ease h e r s e lf is a f : dry t a l e . She could not have gone -.0 f a r that he f a i l e d to hear her c r ie s f o r help i f someone e ls e had attacked her. \/e are s a t i s f i e d -'cat the learned judge c o r r e c t l y b e lie v e d the prosecution witnesses and r e j e c t e d the d e f e n c e c a s e . The a p p e lla n t's g u i l t was proved beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly we dismiss the apneal, DATED at TAKGA th is 12th day o f October, g T 7. JUSTICE OF APP^dL L . M. M?ALILA jig. JUSTICE OP API , D. P. i'lAPIGAiiO Ag. JUSTICE OF APPKAL I c e r t i f y th at t h i s is a true a opy o f the or StITIOIl i)■:I;1;j'IJY I'FGTSTMH.