Sauli Solomon vs Republic DC Criminal Appeal No

IN THE HIGH. COURT OF TANZANIA AT.Mj^YA DC CRIMINAL AIIEAL N 0.104 o f 2 0 0 k (O r ig o from Chunya D i s t r i c t C ourt D i s t r i c t a t Chunya C rim in a l Case No* 67 o f 199&) Sil-IILI SOI/CMONI o o o c o o o u o * « o o o o a o o o » » o o o o o c o o o t > i d I'EjlxLull'^T VERSUS TiiE r?Ei’UBLIC o t > o e o c « . o o o o o o c . o o o o . > o o o . o o o . o o < i o o *RESi ONDENT JUDGi'-iEKT Th* a p p e lla n t was c o n v ic t e d o f the?*!, c / s 268 and 265 c f th e P enal Coder ■*■'£ was a l le g e d b y th e p r o s e c u t io n th e a p p e lla n t s t o le a red b u ll b e lo n g in g t o one H a izu lu s / o K w an tepele (FW1) on 2 3rd M ay, 1193* E a r lie r t h a t d a y th e com plain an t had a sk ed th e a p p e lla n t t o d r i v e th e b u l l t o th e fa rm e r’ s cowshed* T h is was done and th e a p p e lla n t went aw ay. He r e tu r n e d t h e r e i n th e n i g i t l o o k i n g f o r m ilk , w ith w hich he was s e r v e d , and went away* At m id n igh t IW1 n o t ic e d th a t someone was i n t e r f e r i n g v /ith h i s cowshed* T h ese p o i n t s - o n a t t r a c t e d h i s c u r i o s i t y such th a t he went ou t t o f i n d out what v/as happening,, I t was th en t h a t he d is c o v e r e d th a t th e s a i d r e d b u l l was m issin g * IV/1 c o u ld n o t s e e th e t h ie f® He r a i s e an alarm t o summon th e a s s is t a n c e o f h i s n e ig h b o u rs who d u ly resp on d ed * They d e c id e d t o mount a sea rch * I n th e meantime Rashid s / o Motowazirau (IVJ2), th e l o c a l V i l l a g e Chairm an, saw a s t v a y b u ll as he was g o in g t o h i s farm * The lo n e b u l l s t r u c k him and w ondered who v;as in c o n t r o l o f i t * A few moments l a t e r th e a p p e lla n t emerge do He f i d n ot c o n fr o n t th e a p p e l l a n t j i n s t e a d he v/ont b a ck t o th e v i l l a g e t o r e p o r t what he had seen * He g o t fo u r p e o p l e , i n c l u d in g Mawazo s / c Simon (IUjS) t o a s s i s t him* He s t a t e d t h a t th e a p p e lla n t f l e d when he saw *U?orn<» That th e y gave ch a se t o him and managed t o a r r e s t him and s e i z e d th e b u l l a That th e a p p e lla n t was apprehended a s h o r t w h ile t h e r e a ft e r ® The a p \ r lla n t was handed o v e r t o D /C p l* H assan (I'VlVT- Tl'd.s i s th e e v id e n ce upon w hich th e a p p e lla n t v/as c o n v i c t e d , It is common ground th a t ho was c o n v ic t e d w ith o u t h a v in g b een h e a rd b e c a u s e , a c c o r d in g t o AST© S an ga, th e I u b l i c r r o s e cu t o r , t h e a p p e lla n t bi?oke ou t o f th e p o l i c e c e l l i n w hich he was d e ta in e d and went a t l a r g e . On i t s p a r t * and a c t in g on t h i s r e p o r t , th e t r i a l c o u r t d e c id e d th e m a tte r i n th e a b se n ce o f th e a p p e ll a n t , a t th e b e k e s t o f th e I u b l i c I r o s e c u t o r i n term o f s c 227 o f th e C r im in a l P ro ce d u re A c t , "1985* The a p p e lla n t com pla in s i n th e s e c o n d ground o f a p p e a l t h a t i t i s not t r u e th a t he escapedf^om l a w f u l cu stod y # Ke con ten d s t h a t th e ca se was d e c id e d w h ile he was i n cu s to d y * He has c h a lle n g e d th e R e p u b lic th a t th e a l l e g a t i o n About th e a l l e g e d e sca p e was n ot p ro v e d b e ca u se i t i s th e P o l i c e O f f i c e r s who l e f t him in th e lo c k -u p * T h -r o i s no doubt th a t th e le a r n e d t r i a l D i s t r i c t M a g is t r a te was in flu e n c e d bv 'the sta tem en t t h a t was made b y th e I u b l i c P r o s e c u t o r * That sta tem en t was made from th e b a r ; i t was n o t e v id e n ce * T h e r e fo r e i t c o u ld n o t p r o v e ?jiy f a c t 0 I t i s in t h i s c o n t e x t th a t Mr* D a u d i, le a r n e d S ta te A t t o r n e y , has p ra y e d th a t th e p r o c e e d in g s be quashed and a r e t r i a l b e o rd e r e d o I t i s v e r y elem en ta ry k now ledge th a t anyone a c c u s e d o f a crim e has a r i g h t t o be h e a rd b e f o r e ho i s condemned* In f a c t i t is a c o n s titu tio n a l r i g h t f o r su ch a p e rs o n t o b e a f f o r d e d an o p p o r tu n it y t o moke h i s d e fe n c e . A p r o c e e d i n ' in w hich th a t r i g h t i s d e n ie d i s , i p s o f a c t , n u ll - a n d .v o i d * So b e i t w ith t h i s o n e - I w o u ld , as su b m itte d b y ^ r* D au d i, le a r n e d c o u n s e l, quash th e e n t i r e t r i a l , judgm ent and th e c u s t o d i a l s e n te n c e o f f i v e y e a rs * But wd11 i t s e r v e any u s e f u l p u rp ose t o o r d e r a r e t r i a l ? I can h a r d ly f i n d any j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r th a t e x e r c i s e 0 I w i l l sa y why* The a p p e lla n t commenced h i s s e n te n c e on 13th S ep tem ber, 2 0 0 1 Q So fa r he has s e r v e d t h r e e y e a r s and fo u r months ou t o f th e f i v e y e a r s * A fr e s h t r i a l w i l l s e r v e no p u b li c i n t e r e s t , i t w i l l b e p e r s e c u t io n w hich i s n o t in th x ‘ u b l i c i n t e r e s t ,, I n th e p e n u lt im a te , I a llo w th e a p p e a l. C o n s e q u e n tly , th e e n t i r e r e c o r d o f p r o c e e d in g s o f th e t r i a l c o u r t , in c lu d in g th e judgment and s e n t e n c e , i s q u a sh e d 3 T here s h a l l be no t r i a l de navro t T h e r e fo r e i t i s d i r e c t e d th a t th e a p p e lla n t b e d is c h a r g e d from p r i s o n u n le s s h i s fu r t h e r d e t e n t io n s h a l l b e j u s t i f i e d 1-o n some o t h e r l e g a l l y a c c e p t a b le g ro u n d s» D e liv e r e d o / A y '~ - * // ■ % sgds J.M . MACKANJA JUDGE \ *' •-.. . !■■ 10/2/2005 w<• • • V 'V *' ; ITor App-^ii'aiits I n p e rso n \ . - F or Ftospo.i. laorit; Hr t. ’ Mw.^nda 5 S „ A c. C e r t i f i e d truw copy o f tHe o r i g i n a l . DIST'?JCTl?EGIST?u\H