19820505 TZHC Mtwara

IN THE HIGH COUHT :...,.F' TANZANIA •. AT 1'!'1.'v,ARA APPELL;/I'E JUJUSDICTIUh HIGH CUUkT CRIMINAL APPEAL No.45/80 OiUGHJAL CRIIHNAL CASE NUo ;~3 Of' 1980 L-i·• ,;_·;;;~ .i.H::.011~.i:CT COURT G.F l-':r,:~i\SI U.l.S'IRICT AT iV1ASASI (Original Accused) versus TH.t:.: hEPUBLIC o o " "" , o o o o o o RESPONDENT ( Original :C-'rosecutor) J U DG E ME N T MUS!-_!I, Jo The appellant, Jumuia Swalehe, was. charged ;:rnd con1icted for an offenc2 of being in possession of property suspected to have been s-tolen e,r unlawfully acquired c/s 312 of the Penal Code~ He \liS sentenced to pay a fine of Shs.800/= or six months imprisonment in defaulto 'l'he :i:in,,, ,,1as paido The court f 11rther ordered that the ·articles which he ,:as f::Lnd with mainly- afya soap ,1nd washing soap be treated as found. property 2nd aucbioncdo He is appealinr:i :,gainst such' conviction, sentence and order o The appellant wus detai.ned by the police under section 24 of CoPo..:.:o He was found with washing soap and afya soap and about Shso1,000/=• The appellant told th~ police that the property was his as he had bought the sameo The appellant had some cigarettes as well. The police went to the appellant's house wherc r.,ore soap und cigarettes were foundo The appellant insisted that he lv::.d bought the goods lc!v,;fi;,lly. He was charged. He repeated the defence j_n court gi vin9 deL3.i:i-.s of the dates., quantities and places he btmght the articles anc che amount paid .. The appellant admitted he was sellin<; the soap in the mdrket although he had no trading licence. The appellant called the shopkeepe~s from whom hEi had bought the goods among whom wu.s a co-operative she~- where he had bought 70 pieces of afya soap. The witnesses fully supported the appellant's cas, 0 ; t:10.t the soap were lawfully acquired. Very unfortu- nately the leae,ed trial r;1.:::;gistrate found the d,~fe: ce still wanting. The law requi.r eE; the. appellant to give reason.::.. :._2 ~,xplanation only o J 2 In ,this case the appellant adduced evidence which pro·u d beyond any reasonar-le doubt that he lawfully ac':,quired the articles in questiono The 'Conviction was clearly wrongc It is ray hope that the learned I trial magistrate will read the releJ~nt law oh this mattero ThS appeal is allowed. The conviction is quashed and sentence is set asideo The fine which was paid should ~e refunded. Also the appellant should be paid the equivalent·of money obtained by selling the articles which were produced as exhibits at the ,trial in this case. I' Sgd: .-. o!\o Mushi, Judge 5.5.82 Certified true copy of the original. ' / \ :'-.1. : ; I DISTRIC'.i' :s:EGISTR,\R