19880615 TZCA Dar es Salaam

IN THE COURT OF .APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM -- (.QQ.~1: MUSTAFA, J.A. 1 VJAKAME 1 J.J~., .And OMAR, J .A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 58 OF 1988 SELEMANI BAKARI A ALLI MOHAI-1EDI §• ' • . .• APPELLJ\N'IS VERSUS THE REPUBLIC ••• . . . . . . RESPONDENT (Appeal from the conviction of the High Court of Tanzania at Mtwara) (Rubarna, J.) dated the 20th day of Febr'Uf:l:ry, 1987 in Criminal Sessions Case No. 16 of 1986 ------------ REASONS FOR JUWEMENT These two appellan~s were convicted of Manslaughter on their o~m plea and each was sentenced to imprisonment for twenty years. 'l'hey appeared in person before us and they are complaining against the sentence imposed. Ws allowed the appeal~ In respect of, the first appellant, SEL.EM.tiNI BAKARI, we reduced the sentence impo~ed'to a term of ten years imprisonment. In respect of ALLI MOHAriED 9 the second appellant, we reduced the e9utence imp~sed to one year imprisonment. We now give our reasons:. The first appellant stabbed the deceased in the chest with a knife as the deceased was walking home with his companions from a dance one night. It was the first appellant who started all the fracas by pushing the deceased when they· met on the way. During a fight which ensued the first appel1Jant was lmo.cked down to the ground by the deceased, whereupon the second appellant went to the first appellant's aid by holding the deceased. This gave the first appellant .,t·i. • • • o-e,a/2 \ - 2 - . opportunity of taking out his knife and stabbing the deceased with it •. The cause of death was the stab wound on the chest which . ruptured the right lower lung. There is no evidence that the second appellant knew tha.t his companion was armed with a lmife and that he was going to use it dut"ing the senseless fight. Mri J{yaru.ei, learned State Atto1.-ney, co11ced~tl that tli.e learned trial jud.ge should have taken into account that the second appellant I s participa_tion was minima.1. We we.re of the view that, in the circumstances, the sentence of twenty years on the second appellant was unduly harsh and manifestly excessive. That was why we reduced it to one year imprisonme·nt. Mr. J{yaru~i urged, in respect of the first appellant, that while the sentence imposed was severe, it was 1 in the circumstances, richly deserved, and not. excessive. We were of the view that the first appellant's role in the fatal assault was clearly distinguishable from that of the second appellant. He insolently started the trouble and callously and most unnecessarily knifed the deceased. Taking all the relevant factors into consideration, ho,,,rever 9 we were satisfied that the sentence of twenty years was manifestly excessive and that a jail term of ten years would meet the justice of _the case. We accordingly reduced the sentence imposed to one of ten years imprisonment. DATED at DAR ES SALAJJ.1 this 15th day of June, 1988. A. MUSTAFA, JUSTICE OF APPEAL L • M. MAK.AME JUSTICE OF APPEAL