19930901 TZHC Dodoma

IN TilE marr com~T OF T.A.1,;"Z.ANIA ---- AT DODOW.iA - . AI·P::m:LL.Al~ JlI:JSDICTI ON. (PC) CRIIIITNA"L jpFEAL NO. · 36 OF --, 1993 n~ TDif :DI~T.lUCT cou:::T OP· })ODON.A.. AT ])01)()11~ · CRIMINAL JJE,T.AL HOo. 278·0F · 1992: . , ·Fron °ric;ina,1 Cr.ininal · Ca~e ·Noa 3 OF 199·2~ ~ •- the Pr.ima:ry Court· of ·Dodo~a Di'strict' it ·cm.iofm.A. JtIDGl'iiTINT · . ...., ' Maina, J. r:--. b/,th~ ~im~j ~;ur~ ~-t "J,_,11onwa The .a?pel;L~t .was_ c;n~c_t-~~- of roblJel"y with violence, and he·- was ~onte~~~d t; ·f~f~een re~;:11 ioprisonment. -. a.ppe al s t o Ris .:-ppeal to the Dodona district coui~t was· dis:missed , 'an··d h.. e·....-.ow 0 this Court. On 12th Octc.,ber, 1991 ele.ven °heiici of cattle were ·;;~,)l~~ f;;..~om the complainant, PU.1 Mwaoba Me.ina, · who,. ..1-to.s:·assul ted •and:,tln;'eat,Ered w.i. th [;Ul'l by people· lnlOLl he did not identifyo Later, tbre.e Qf the cattlr1 .w:e~e found slashed with lai.ives, and eight were :2ecovcred. alive,, The coraplaina.nt was not present when the cattle were recoveI'ed,, :PW. 2 Ez-3kj .·. ·;yaula.ni, the Chairnan of the trad.i tional defence group C)r.mm}.y imown :{ri 11 SunQJ.sungu11 9 said that he arrested the appe~lant on 16tl1-T".ll11:nry 7 199~, e..nd that sone people ,Jb.,_.fil he did not nention by naoes 9 hc.,1 ceJ.led EzeK.ia to arrest the n.ppello.nto It was 2.llei;ed tb:::t those ·~·;.r.med pe"ple :f:•.md the eppelloot with the cattleo PWo3 Elie. Mzuka said tlr,t on 16th 00tober 9 1992 he and 1 etter to the court dcclL·.il'lG . tc. t,w~·if)r:. - - 0 ·:-0 wi t10f i 0s Sur.1Dcnsas were issued ti, tl:eL,., Ti10 .::-.:;_1pellc.n-t t:..en cllc.n.:_:cd his 1:ri.1:1J ~ r.nd he did not wish tc: cnll then~ The eviclcmcc c.£,2.1nst t:'..10 ,r::_::cllr.-J.'l :. is c,. :.-: fusing end contr2ilictoryo It is not certain 1·rhcn exactly t::o -:?pcllc.nt w2,s n::rested, wd 1-tl.10th0r he was found in possession cf the stolen c.:-.ttl~,; p~;~ 2 Wz,ncic. was only oallod wcs on 16th JcJ1unry, 19910 Tho 0ff':::mce wc.s oow1:1itted :.on 16th October, 1591 c.ccord.ing to the oonplc.in2,."ltu SuI'cly, t~o c,rpollc.nt coul.:i not. l1r.vo 'teen ...... • 2 arrested for the off0nce before the o-ffence wri.s c ,Lni ttedn There is more confusion in that according to the rocor~ of the prinary court, the appello.nt appeared in theccurt on,13th .in.nur.ry, 1991, wJ4le it is alleged that he comitted the offence on 16th October, 1591~ "nd thc..t is not possible. 'fhere is also· the evidence by P:f.3 _Elia who clleced that he &"?ested the appellant on 16th October, 19.92, c, clear contradiction :fron the evidence of 1'1'1.2 Ezekia that the 2.ppellMt w2,s a:i.'Tested on 16th Jn,11Ua.r;y-, 1$910 1 Even if the n.ppcllant had been arrested on 16th ')Gtober, 1~91 with the ' . ... . . ' - -· Cattle, it has not been explained why he wn.s not sent to the prina:ry court until Je.nua.ry, 199_2._ Tl10:chni~go sheet is, incidentc.llyJ d::tod 15 ;h Ja.nu,a;cy-, • ' • • ~. I 1992. 'l!b.e evidence alleo.ne that the ~ppellant was a.rrested in ~ossession of the stolen cattle is so .. contradictory end confusing tha.t no co,,ll't of la.v can base a conviction on such evidence., It seons to ne that the lower cout' "" ~ • ? ~ did not evaluate th2'.t evidence or consider the oont.radictl·ons;. ... 11he conti.ction was .based on very unreliable evidence,, 2J1d the' appellant is en-ti tlqd .'.o acquitt~. The appecl is 2-llowedo The conviction which is ·not' -supp)1•·ted by t?e .iiepublic i_s qua.shed, and the sentence is sot aside,:- 'It is ordered ·th~t the c.ppellant be relee,~ed fron ~sfo,dy. f'orthwi th unless he is othe1:wiso 11;:.wfully held., ',, (We J.,. }1aino.) _. -.!&"])GE . At Dodona. AJ;)pellcnt presont.,