abasi ismail athumani ndossi vs republic 1998 tzhc 2024 30 march 1998

.V -Hi Oi TANZANIA AT DAE ES SALAAM o t o m i c ilT>P>j'.’ & e 0 e o o * « o « * *• ° • c * ‘- A3A3I ISMAIL ATHIJMa NI Ni)ObSI Versus '^•ioiJ0-i.N.uiiiNT TK/j H3PUBLIC «>»> o • *« •* * • * • • • ** °° °°0 09 ° ° J n 1) G M ii N I r.HTPETA^ J°: The appellant, Abasi Ismail Athumani N d ° s x „ho was the second accused at tho trial. wa , ^ ^ ■4-Vi the offence of unlawful pos^e^fo another with the Dimgerous Drugs Ativan contrary to sections 9(1) and 231 f i n a n c e as read togetner « t h ^ „ Aot to, and section 59 o f , the - o n o ^ c *u- (Q.accused „as m of 1984. After a full trial, the .- • • N o .13 ol lyot. . . . _ ;nd sentenced acquitted but the appellant was convxcxaa a, ■ to five years imprisonment. He now appeals agaxas, ...... conviction and sentence. » o ^ i~n's -violence was that on 1 8 th November, 199*. The p r o s - ^ t . n - v m a „o. C.<*0 «/3,t Danford CP.VM) went * - £ ^ n ^ Bar at M o roS orc. P.W.1 went there - t e r ^ ^ ^ suspected criminals were at that pla.c. , ,,, T or,+ y-ir] v.-ib co-accused. On On arrival arrivax there, he ---- found the aoot, ^ — ~ On seeing him, the appellant and his colleague tri.d to run a w ^ , on seeing . ,h Police Officers, managed but P.W.n, who was accompanied by oth.i - ^ ^ to arrest the appellant and his colleague. At t;,e ,xme ox to arrest tne ------ 4.vi-i«<rc* arrest, the appellant was found in possession of, - o n g other things 7 Z ; ^ ox- soda - two of s d r is a . »a two of fanta. F ...1 observed that the two mirinda tins had some small holes wnxch were covere with glueo This made P,W,1 suspect that something haa oeen injected into those Hirinda tins. The two tins were then sent to the Government Chemist o In his Report, the Government Chemxst stated that, tne two tins had their contents mixod with a dangerous drug caxled. Lorazepam or Ativan,vhich dru0 xl ::.%id to cause heavy drowseness or sleep and can even cause dey.th. ’ .'.'I''? Report, wnich was tenciered. as exhibit P. 2 , further stated that the drug is a Part I poison and sc cannot be used without a doctor :s prescription, The appellant was then charged with this of jV see, In his defence, the appellant admitted that he was iound in possession of the drug. He added, however, that trio drug was prescribed for him by a doctor at Kinondoni Hospital, and he produced a prescri­ ption which was tendered as Exhibit D.1, An examination of Exhibit D.1 shows that the prescription was given to the appellant on 27th March, 199^1 was a dose for three days. There is no prescription for another doeeothereafter• That being the position, and as c o r r e c t l y submitted by Hiss Otaru, learned state attorney, the possession of the drug 'oy trie appellant some nine months later without the relevant prescription amounted to illegal possession of the drug. The appellant's guilt, therefore, was established beyond reasonable doulft. With regard to the sentence, the learned trial senior resident magistrate gave good reasons fox' passing the sentence and, if anything, the sentence erred on the side leniency. For the foregoing reasons, aopeal fails and so is hereby dismissed in its entirety. > - i! ' i'": V' ‘ a. jCchipsta JtTDGE Judgment delivered in Court this 30th day of March, 1998 in the absence of the parties. 7 : B . D .~ C lj2 P E T A JUDGf 30/3/1^98