19700715 TZHC Mwanza3
The conviction was justified based on sufficient evidence, but the sentence on count one was incorrect and required variation to comply with section 29 of the Penal Code.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19700715 TZHC Mwanza3
- Parties
- Appellant: Masuja Goboli; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 15 July 1970
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed as to conviction, sentence varied on count one
- Legal Topics
- Possession of Illicit Liquor, Destroying Evidence, Sentencing
- 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
Masuja Goboli
Appellant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for possession of local liquor and destroying evidence was justified
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was correct under the Penal Code
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction was justified based on sufficient evidence, but the sentence on count one was incorrect and required variation to comply with section 29 of the Penal Code.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed as to conviction, sentence varied on count one
Orders
- Sentence on count one substituted with 300/- fine or four months imprisonment in default
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN TF LIGH CCTJItT OP T.iTIL IT riiNzA Appellate Jurisdiction c:nrINAL APPEJ\L NO. 364 OP 1970 (Originol Crininal Case No. 1135 of 1969 of the district court of Mwanza before II. H. Cmari Esq., distr'ct nagis'rate). MASJJJA GOBOLI ...... .......APPJNT (oIc.iL jccus) versus T PEPUIC . .' . • . . . . . . . . . .r1sPoI T(o'aGIlTLL PEO1JTOr) CHA-E:- 1st count - Being in possession of local liquàrlrnown as moohi c/s 30 of Act No.62/1966 9 and G.11T.451 of Moshi Monufacture and Distillation; 2nd count - Destroying evidoncec/s 109 of'tho Penal Code. JUDGMT KThIICHA, J. The accused in this case was convicted on two counts ne1y being in' possession of local 1iuor known as moshi. end destroying evidence contrary to section 109 of the Penal Code, lie was sentenced o a fine of .300/- or 6 months in default on count one end to 4 ont.i) pris onnent on count two. There'was ufficient evidence justifying the accusods convicticu on the two counts'. This appeal has icen adnitted to lozring in order to correct the sentence on count one' Under be6tion 29 of the Penal Code, a person fined between s.100/tb 400/- would be 1iab1e to 4 nonths inprisonnent only in default. The proviso applies to the sentence in this case. For the above reason, the accused s appeal aoinst conviction is V / disuissed but'his sentence on count one is varied and substituted with one of .300/- fine or four ionths' imprisonment in default. I Delivered in Court at Mwanza on this the 15t,11y, 1970. L' ( ii. P. ' , aicha) JU]E t