19830817 TZHC Mtwara

.... r " IN TEE HIGH COUR'l' OF T ANZAN;IA .: ' I AT !•1T\IJARA I APPELLAT~ JURISUICTION HIGH COURT C~IMINAL APPEAL No:7/82 OtHGIIML CRH!IJ._;AL CASE No.111 OF 1980 Oi-" J.'i·It": DISTRICT COURT OF TUr~I.JURU DISTRICT AT TLJNDUH.U Before Coiio fviSANATI, Esq., $EN10R ~t\GHiTRATE I-li_J·r }!l.~; ·~EDI C' 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O o OAP l-"'ELLJ;.i'J'r (Original Accuse-ct) versus T~E REPU3LIC o ■ ~---····••o•RiSPONUENT (Original Prosecutor) JUDGfvJENT I SAMATTA, J. This is an appeal fror,1 a decision of the district cl)urt of 'l'unduru ' ,, district where:!by the appellant and his co..:.accused, who has preferred to lodge no a~oe·l J. ... u ·~ were convicted of office breaking and stealing, contrary to so 29G(1) of the Penal code, and each of them was sentenced to six years' imprisonment. The appeal has no merit. It was conc~sively eastablished at the trial that on July 21, 1980, the office belonging to the Nandembo ,I Domestic Mission School was broken into and various articles - including a wall clock and a tape recorder - were stolen therefrom. Ten days later the appellant, accompanied by'his co.;...accused, visited the shop of PW2, l'-'ius2 Salanjeo The appellant .was in possession of the stolen wall-clock while his co-accused cairied the tape·recorder. They offered the two articles for sale. The s~le did not take place. Instead the two men wen:: a.;:rested and, later, charged

in court. Although the men visited the sh op at night time the witnesses, who_ included Mus~a Salanje I s neis:;}·1:::.,our, were able, by the aid of light from a pressure to see clearly ; . lamp,/what the two men cRrried and put on ,the sale counter. In their defences the tv1c men denied to have conveyed! the stolen articles to Salanje•s shop, but I think the learned ttial magistrate was perfectly entitled to r~ject 7 as he did, those assertions as lies. Not even a shadow of reason ,vas advanced why r;1ussa Salanje and h:Ls neighbour should have been so wicked as to manufacttire a case against the appellant I , and his co-accusedo I would dis~iss the appeal against conviction; ••••oo/2 -- . ..,t 2 The sentence of si::: years imprisonment is, undoubtedly on the high side, taki~g into account that the appellant, wh6 is a first offender is fa1r1y youn9. But those who p lay with fire should not 1 complain if they get burnt. ~entencing the appellant and his cci-accused 1 the learned trial rnagj_strate observed that the offence of office breaking and stealing was on the increase fn Tunduru district. If that was so, it was quite proper for deterrent sentences to be imposed. I hope \ when he finishes serving his sentences the appellant will have realised t~=t he is better out of prison than in it. The sentence is hereby cortfirmed 1 as is that of the appellant's co-accused. The appeal is dismissed in its entirety,.. Sgd: B ■ A• Samatta, Judge Delivered at Ivitwara this 17.th gay of August, 1983, in the presence of Mro Kaduri, Couns€;J; for the Republic .. Sgd: 3.A. Samatta, Judge Certified true copy of the original.,