19881112 TZHC Mtwara
The convictions were unsafe due to insufficient evidence identifying the items found with the appellants as those stolen from the complainant, and the confession evidence was discredited.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19881112 TZHC Mtwara
- Parties
- Appellant: J3B/J3 BDI-'iTIDI Kli.Tu111B; Appellant: Hi:JUSI llD/:11 SONGtl; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 12 November 1988
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Receiving Stolen Property, Identification of Stolen Property, Burglary, Confession Evidence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
J3B/J3 BDI-'iTIDI Kli.Tu111B
Appellant
Hi:JUSI llD/:11 SONGtl
Appellant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellants were properly convicted of receiving stolen property under section 311(1) of the Penal Code
- 2 Whether the identification of the stolen property was sufficient
- 3 Whether the confession evidence was reliable
Ratio Decidendi
The convictions were unsafe due to insufficient evidence identifying the items found with the appellants as those stolen from the complainant, and the confession evidence was discredited.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- convictions quashed
- sentences set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
, IliT 'ITE IIIGH COIDT OF T/J:J2...::. NJJ~ IIIGII COTI:1~1 CTI.TIUN:.L 1'.1.Pt:J}J., UOe147 OF 1908 C ~Q?.1}:3~lic.lctod Crininnl ::.p;_)od Ho.114/86) Ori[:;i.ri.....'tl C:i.·inii-12,l C2,.'Jo No. 33 of 19G5 of t~10 ' Diotri.ct Cou:;.~t of m:,ch:~n::.,--vroa District d Nc,c:.1incwo2. Boforog : ..• Y.. l::.r.11.,ui Doq. 1 District r.:2,~ist:;.~0,to lo lJ3I3l,..S ILJI CID IC..'I'Ur.illL.l ~ . ♦ Oooooooo•o li..PEJLL!JTTS 2 o Hi:JUSI 1:.DLN sona:o:~ Versus TI:UJ R..'JPlIDLIC o a ,. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • RDSPONDDNT JUDGMDNT Rubru;m.,_ J • I /J3B/J3 BDl-'iTIDI Kli.Tu111B/:. m'J.d IIl:JUSI llD/:11 SONGtl.. wore convicted of rcccivin3 stolon p:roj_)Crt;y- contz,o...::y to section 311 (1) of tho Penal Code. There is sufficient eviclonce tlmt the house of Le.r,1ock Mayola PWol was buxglocl on tho niGht of 2nd Juno, 1985 2.l1.d sevoz·e.J. i taus valued 2-t shs.32,400/= stolon fron tb.o:coin. The:;:>e is b.owovc1° insufficient evidence goi11c; to shou thr,t tho i tons fov.nd in possession of tho two appell211ts were Dl.10l'J.G'St those stolon f:,:-ou the house of tho s2.ic.1 12.ncck tfo,yolo •. I hr.,vc very co.rofully [;'one t)u•ouch tho ovidonco of Lnr.ieck l.inyolo on t~_10 i:JSUO of how ho hr'.d id.cnt5.fiocl his stolon pI'OJ)Ol~ty. Jill that ho stato9- was that tho rrope:rtios sho1m to him by tho police m:u-o··.;hi~; ·,:i,s>:to·,:110w ho he.cl identified them uhot>o:c b;T spocio..l narks m:- not is not stated. Identific2,tion of thirics l:i.l:o clothinc, radio cassette o:i.~ r, wrist watch, all rn1ss proc1ucod and cor.1non itons needs raoro particvl2.1~sation tJ::D.11 w!.mt wc:,s done in this 02,so. .Ls to the evidence of B 3726 D/Sgt. Benard lfaulG . PW.~ that Lblx1S Honed Ifutw.1ba. hacl confcssoc:l to hir.1 of having particir>o.tod till ~ ':~--- ·\. ' i '•,\ '. ·. i. .,_ 2 in bu.reline; tho house of Lr..::1ock Hayolo and. fron t].1c•oin siioli;l.n:i;tho:;_:l-:k\t1s listocl in tho che,:;:0 o shoot, cll I he,vc to stc-,tc i0 t:.-.. d this oviclonco w2,s cliscrocli tod by the t~cid cou.-rt or else tl,.o nj)j__)OJ.12.nt would hc:i.;vo teen convictocl of bt1.rc;l2,J:-y nncl stcc,linco Ths cliscrccl.ictinc; of thin ovj_clonco is justified ul1on consL'..o:;:;:;_:\_; tl1.0 entire evj_d.onco of PlT .5 who is s~:.om1 to be hosi h'..nt on clotr..ilso TLo i-ritnoss docs not soon to have put uucl1 oophnsis on such on inpm:-t2,nt clok,il c.s it cones ov.t cltU:inc cross-ex0i.1inc,tion _of this 1:i tnoss n:nd to DY wny of thinkin0 noro as 2.11 \ afterthought. On considoJ:'r,tion of tho ovidonco on ::i.·ocorcl therefore I fincl :i.t not safe to upholcl tl10 convictions. Tho consolidated appoaJ.s arc acco:-cdi:ngly a.llmrocl. T.,.c convictions 2,ro hereby q_t1:•,o::od nnd tho invosccl sentences sot c,sid.c. Tho appollc:nts 8.I'O to be set free at once unless they c.:rc otl:orwioo l.")Qinc l2cwfully hold on other n2.ttors. Usi:rlQ' ny rovisional pouors 1 I quash tho convi tion ontcrod in rcsvcct of ;,"..,bd2-ll2h S2.j_di !Jxlnllcl1, tho first accusecl in this case ancl set aside tho inposod sor•.tonco. IIo too is to bo rolc2-sod froo prison at once muoss ho is otherwise 1)oinc le.wfully !1old in custody on other r.mttors. Jud.GO 12.11.88