20171005 TZCA Mbeya 1

' IN THE COURT Of APPEAL OF TANZANIA · AT MBEYA :·'. · {CORAM: MUSSAJ.A~ MZIRA\'.,)~A., And NDIKA~.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 599.0F 2015 : : .i I :·,:'• ''· ...., ;· :·: : ALEN ALEX ZAN DA MWAKYl)SA ··········••uu•,•·······~·••.•············ APPELLANT . , . VERSUS :., , . ·.•;·,;•, . , i THE REPUBLIC ••••••••••••••••••••.•••• ■■■ ri ■ i-■■■~■ ~11 ■•~,~•••• .. ••••d••t1.a41~ ■.11 ■ u ■ !lno1111 RESPONDENT , • I ,, . • ·, • ' .•.• ' (Appeal from the decision of the High tourt at Mb~ya) {A, M. Lyamuya., SRM--·with Extepded . .. J.urisdktim.1} . . . ted the 9 th d~yo.f Ma.r:c.h, i.0~5 ·· ·· · -··· in·;· .:·.. --•.:, :. · . . . Criminal Ap_2_eal_No. 34-·of 20:l4 . __ _..n,.-~llal-•-.:·_·,,;,_,:~,,. •••~'~1-.·...:.·'_:' ·;• _.'·:·.,; ,,:. . . ,. . ! : , . ': .- . ~ ,,. ....• ~- ~ ...... • J ..... , .. •' ••• • • ••. ,. ·' . : MZIRAY, l.A: ·. ·. ·:., •· -.': :, ;.'. :·: and convicted of..the off~nce of armed robbery contrary to section · .,: ·.,'. ,:.-;_.: :··1·.,-·: 1 287 A ofth~ Penal .Code .. The trial ~ou_rt,,)h~-'.~esipent Magistrate's . --=-1 . .. .. ' . . . . . .- . .. . . . ·. . . .I ...; , •:- ··.:.... · .I Court of Mbeya pt _Mbeya, sentenced him to>~erye thirty. ,{30) y~an; . .imprisonment. 1 Aggrieved· by that decision of the trial court, he_ appealed to the: High Court of Tanzania at·Mbeya, wherein, his appeal was registered as DC Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2014. Invoking the provisions of section 45 (2) of the Magistrates' Courts'Act, Cap llRE:2002 ,· the.Judge incharge, Mbeya, ordered that the ·said· appeal be transferred to the Resident Magistrate's Court at Mbeya, for hearing before A. M:. Lyamuya, Senior Resident , ·, Magistrate with Extended Jurisdiction. At ·the Re~ident Magistrate's Court, the ~ppeal was registered as (DC) _Criminal Appeal No. 34 bf . • .. • . .'. •' , .' ~ . ·.. . • , . : ' . • '• I ... 2014. The said Senior Resident Magistrate with extended jurisdiction . I ' heard the appeal and· dismissed it. : :· · Undaunted~_the_appe_llan~ .carrie,,before this Court,- raising eleven · · ,__ ,. : .... (11) grounds in his Memorandum of Ar.,peal. He was unrepresented -: :··· ..-, / . '• _:. .: " before us .while ·the Respondent ·Republic was represented by Ms. Catherine Paul, learned State-Attorney.: Before, · commencement of · hearing and for · a proper .. . . determination of the· appeal and avoidance of doubt, the Court raised 2 . ·.a po·int,, sua motu, by seeking clarification from the parties -on the propriety of the Notice of Appeal filed by the appellant on 30/3/2015. ~he Court then invited the- parties to address;·on th:is pojnt. · The appellant, a layman, _had nothing useful to submit on ·this point of law. He claimed th~t the Court should consider him as he is confined in prison and he is. hot· the one· ·who drafted- the notice. Hence, he said the prison authority 'is ~·tM~"on~ ld:be blamed. On her part, the. l~arneg ___State. ..... .. Attorney, conceded that the '• , · defectivJ. She:· pointeq out that the Notice of /.\ppeal refers -to a . , ,.,_... ,·.. ; :- ; ;·' ' ·.., . ~ , ,_. ·.. .. ' .. ~ . .; . decision in Criminal Appeal ·No.:· 4'' of 201.4 instead of (DC) Criminal • •., ' ! . Appeal No. 34 of 2014. · .·... ' ... \,., The law is that in a ·criminal appeal, .it is the notice of appeal ' • • ( • • , , : • • _:,.- I , : , / :••, • ; ' >• . ' ;, .. \"; ,:,::\ :•~• '. .• •: , . _-. _:;-· - :·,•: that institutes the appeal according 'to Rule 68 (1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 20.09. Going bythe/~'pp~ll~~t;~' N6tice of Appeal, it is obvious that the. same is fatally defectiv~·-,i·h: the sense ttiat it makes •, • •• ; •: • I : •• ... : ••' ~ ,• • •, • •• ! ' • reference to the wrong registry number of the case or citation, ! • .. ' ·• ; ; 3 · namely, Criminal Appeal No: 4 o( 2014; instead of the correct reference, i.e. (DC} Criminal Appeal No: 34 of 2014. The· Court Rules ·ih its First Schedule, Form B, provides for a format for a notice of appeal a~d for the particulars to be filled · therein. The.format . . was.not . . complied . with. . As. discussed above, the I registry number of the case to be appealed against is wrongly referred. . . A situatiort similar to the present one· was encountered by the Court in the case 6( SirriaUke· Mwanjoka· v •. Republic/ Criminal ·-,·: Appeal No. 138-of 2010, CAT (unr~ported). In that case Mr. Kakc;laki, ·- ·'·:. '·,- ·' learned State Attorney who appeared for the respondent RepL1hlic, : ·.. :-·· . . had submitted that _the notice qf appeal wrongly indicated the decision appealed against•to:.,have been. .. in :respect of Criminal Application No 1·.9f..20d7de!lvered. QYJhe.~HJgh.,Court (Lukelelwa, .J.) .. . . on. 23/07/2007; while :the-proper decision which was being appealed against was Criminal Revision No 1 of.2007. This Court held: ,, . . . ' ''The. law is that- in a criminal appeal it is the notice ·of appeal that institutes the appeal , • 4 - J.. ·(Rule 61(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules/ _197i (old Rules) and Rule 68 (1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 (new Rules). Going by t[,_e appellant~ notice of appeal we would fully agree with M~. !(akolaki · that .it is_ fatally defective in its 'reference to the wrong registry number of - the case . or citation; namely, i l •. ., . Criminal Application No 1 of 2007; ·inst(;ad of .! ' I _,i the correct reference, ...... " In Elia Masena Kachala and. Two , others Vs· Republic --- ~ t :· ··: :--.,.,. . '! Criminal Appeal_ No. 156 of 2012 (unreported), this Court observed . . II' ' . , .. ",. '.. I•' l. . ..., . . .,.. ·.. ~ . .- .-.;. -7 ''For· a notice of appeal to th/.<; ·Court to b_e · rI ";, . ,. vc1lid, it is mandato1y that it must indicate not I' only the date of the challengedjudgment and I . . the_ name · of . the -. 'trial/appe/Jale, · · Judge/magistrate;· but -also. the triiil/appellate . court . ·a11d. the correct '. . registra_tion ' , ·, . . -: ,number . . ,: . of the case/appeal in the lower court." . . ..... ,·,' .. J · . . . . [Emphasis added.] See also the decision of the Court of Appeal in Patrick Ngongi ' . ' .:.·! 1 Kindanyani V~ "The -Republic, Criminal .Appeal. No_.253 of 2005 _ . ';· w _. . . ~ .... ~ '. -··. '.,.. [unreportecf]. 5 ... ·.. :. Based on the above decisions, there is. no dqubt that the Notice · of· Appeal filed in this Court by the appeiiant on 30/3/2015 is incurably defective . . for failing .to insert ., . in . .it the correct registration •,• . 1_ ... t , .... number of the case in the'first appell~te.court ...,, .... ·-·· , , ......,.. ; ·In conclusion. . therefore,... since. the appeUanfs , . .. Notice of Appeal ' , . ~ in this appeal is incur.ably .defective~ "that_, renders the appeal incompetent. For being incompetent, w,e are constrained to, and we hereby strike it but. · : .· · · .... ,.' .. ·. ··::),:_:· ·-::·:· .. th DATED at MBEYA this 5 day of October,·2017. · K.-M. MUSSA JUSTICE OF APPEAL . :'.R/E: S. MZIRAY _JUSTICE OF.J\,PP,.~f ~::: :.:i ·• G. A. M. NDIKA•··· ..JY.,STl~.E.:·9F:J\PPEA~. :·•,( I certify th.at th.is, is a t.n1e copy of the original. ·.._:._:,- >·. ;} i ( :··:.·· .....· .. , ' ,c,:ro;;; •c.~--.·RA R · . . . ' ·------- AL ..... ;·:. ·. 6