19921204 TZHC Tabora

- IN THE HIGH COURT OF T1HTZANI.:i. :.'!:: TABORA. --~.~---'"',_.,.....,._. MIDr;: CRIMINAL APPLICATION N0.12/92 IF ':1H::: J:-1ATTJr~ OF AN APPLICATION TO ArPELL OUT 0~ TIM:f:I: U/S :314 (a) (2) (b) OF CAP.20. - AND JN.THE MATTER OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CASE i'.Oo 64/90 OF KIBONDO DISTRICT COURT:. RULAKUHBUYE KAYOKA • • •. •. •·• ••• • •. • ••••.••.APPLICANT Versus REPUBLIC• ••••••••••• • • •· •• • ••••••• .- ••••••• RESPONDE11T • Ru~J.!':£.;;J.. Application to appeal out of time •. 9_,h_a_r..s..,~,E: · !_~~~,..9...<t.!1.ll:~~: · Burglary c/s 294 (1) of the Penai Code Cap~ 16 •. _g_ftd_.9.2EP1..t Stealing c/ s 265 of the Penal Code Cap.16 •. ;>.£,d__C,<?.P.1~~: Robbery· L::_th violence. c/s 285 and 286 of the Pene.l Code•" KATITI. Je' -•··*-~-• um The night· of 15/9/1989 saw and witnessed, the burglarious entry of the. complainants dwelling house, _and propert.ies worth Shs • 5, 245/ =, of the complainant himself - NDAGUBAKB S/0 l'IT1 IBAHAKALL stolen there from.' Again on the night of 2/11/1989, as the said pomplainant was innocently asleep, he was rudely awE,kened by the haphazard· falling of things, in the house. The complainant discovered the door• wa_s op~n_ and ajar, Still dominated by curiousi-t-;-;-; a.nd thinki:pg the ~hief was still inside the house, he shut the door behind him, but the thief, 1st accused LUKALAKUMBUYE KAYDKA, broke out of the house, holding a, chiclr:en, and upon. the complainant grabing ~ apprehending him, the :fj_1,,st accused who the:o, was a1"med with a panga.,. :ldmirdstered pang a blm•!:-:: upo:-, ::· .0 complainaut, resisting to release the chicken, till the f'h'st ?-cc used" s son, the 2nd accused came to the assistance of his father, the first accused. The 2nd accused managed to retrieve tbe .chicken and pang£1. from the first accused• and took to his heels, and henc· the apprehension, and indictment of ·• ./3. - - the !,ccused personG i::c:.,.):..,c I{c.03.nda · Primary Court• The said first a~.~used se9ond -~ccused persons - 1 - LUKAKUMBUYE KAYOIV:. /.lm - 2 ..... KAJO:t_'_ L~LAE::UMDUYF.,. father and son respectively, pleaded guilty, a'nci· wore convic •~¢d: a~f: charged; on their own pleas of gµilty. on three.l: . .. ·, ,. c~unts; ·•.. The. . fir.st accu·sed. • •.\.. was sentenced to f five, one, and fift~en· years imprisonment· on the first, second and 3rd co4pts respectii·ely 1 · sentences td run co:t;10urre:utly • The 2nd accused, then juven:i'.le and only aged fifteen· :Years, was only subjected to., corpm:o.l punisl1· ...1ent., The first accu1rnd/convict, qerein· to be called, the applicant unsuceassful=ly. ,appenle_d to K:ibon_do D;i.strict, wh'ich. vide Judgment • .... ~ • ,?· • delive1'ed.11 on •the l:i/11/l:9.9,0;, dismissed the appeal, The applicant .. ,. ~ < • • . • . did not appeal till June 1992, when he filed this application, to. appeal out ofti1~\Es_,.,. '..Jis r~~l?o:i:ii:r for•.delay, bei1Jg frequent -transfers, .. . . . . •. ~ from prison to prison. Mr. Kaduri, Senior.State Attorney appearing for the Republic, ros:isted the appiicf>.~ic,n, submitting as he did, that the ~pplicatic:.1 J.iad no merits at all. After reading the record d·,.rLifully, I cannot agl"ee witb the· leorned State Attorney more, that this application lr.clrn r.ierits. First, the en.use of th_<;; applicants delay in filing t'hG a.ppeal within the s_tatutory time - see section 25 of the Magi_st1·il~~i;.C~l\:i.~-~tt- u:'.:;J9Q4. - is ~ot sufficiently ------ t < articu18ted, and even Cates~are co:u~iniently·avoided, Second, -the convictions are concretely founded~,for the properties stolen, on both nights i·.e •. 10/9/1989 and 2/11/ - '"'89,. nnd well.. identified by the ~· .. . ~ complainant, and tendered as Exhibit ABCD,· ·were recovered from the ·-~- applican~s house~ And to crown it all, tl~e applicant, unequivocally ' pleaded guilty and e.drnitte:d the f~lcts th£i.t cqpstituted the above ~ ' . . offences, and such being the case, h·e cannot now be, allowed to retreat., A:pd third, ·:;ho applicants, pleas of guilty, uncon'Gestably unequivocal, prccedine; the sentence, and the sentences imposed being ' , . ' . statutoi..,y minimum· .:;cmtcnces, under the Minimum Sentences Act 1992, and as thereafter amended~ not even mercy,itself would da~e reduce· the said sentences"·· In th0 cir•curnstances~ therefol"'e the application has 1992~ BcU. KLTITI, •. ' ---.•-··,,,,- •.."""'! ·. ·'t ~... . i - - ~ ... 4/12/1992. (1) Mr. Uwi::mpoma, St:-:-..:3 Attorney. (2") Apliccnts absent_,