19830829 TZHC Arusha

c - ,1 IN THE HIGH. COURT OF TjNIj:

APPELLATE JURISDICTION (HIGH COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL NO0 173/79 C/F. No0 174/79 ORIGDLtL CRIMINAL CASE NO. .30 OF 1979. OF THE DL3TRICT COURT OF KITETO DISTRICT AT KITETO, W±LLIA IRONGI .4 0.000 P 60000 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a a • e aa 0 0 0 0 .APPELLAflT 0 (ORIGINiL ACCUSED)

VERSUS THE UBLIC:: :: :: : :::::: : ::: : .::: (ORIGIITL PROSECUTOR) L U D G E MT E Ji D. QcL4co This is an appeal by both accused persons against conviction and sentence passed against them in the District Court Kiteto at Kjbaya0.: At the hearing of this appeal(the appellants had indicated that they woild not appear at the hearing)Mrs. Lyimo, the Learned State tttorney supported the:conviction against both appellants0 Upon Deusalof record of pi'oceedings of .the lower r . . court I find little evidence ,of stealing against appellant. KARAI KWSHO who was the 2nd Accused at the Trial0 No, one saw this appellant steal the nine heads of cattle. There is evidence that when both accused reached a place called t Loselenge' the 2nd accused told the 1st accused that he was not prepared to go further with the hustling of cattle anymore. . ... . 1' Pt The sworn testimony of 1st ccusod MILIii KRYONGI clearly shows that 1st accused had asked 2nd occused to help him driVe his cattle to which reouest he agreed. Under eross—examination by prosecution the lat accused said 11 2nd accused did not inQuire how I got the cattle In his L 6 own sworn statement 2nd accused said that he had agreed to help 1st accused dria his: •catt1è. without knowledge that the said cattle had 166 : tO.l Lnd when he learnt that the cattle had been'..st-óie:herefused to go any further0 The prosecutiOn d..i not

:.cha:onge this testimony of 2nd accused. For these reasons Ifind that there was no evidence againct the 2nd accused IKWSHO and hereby allow his appeal and quash the con'iictibñ and set. eside the sentence passed against him and order his immediate release unless held for any other 1wful reaôñ Now I'trn to the appeal .of the first accused si There Js clear evidence that 1st accused was cauht with the cattle of PJ )J The testimony of P.7 1 was not challenged by the 1st accused0 In his own sworn testimony he admitted having purchased stoln. cattle0 In an answer to a question put to him by the Trial Court, he repliedtcattle theft is not a good act and Iadmit, that I actedfoolishly to buy stolen cattle having knowl gbaUse the .youngmen had had told m& His story that he bought these nine heads of cattle from 2 small boys was ot believed and he was accordingly convicted as charged0 I find no merit in the appeal of MILIAKA-RYONGI and hereby dimic ite In the final analysis of 'the.se tWo appeals the judgment is follows App ellant I(ARI KWAHO .hppeal allowed, conviction quashed and sentence set aside. Ordered that appellant be releaced forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. ~ jM cllant MILI_KtRYONGI ippea1 dismissed0 D. 10 TI 29/8/1983. ..e0. /3. Delivered on 29th ugust, 1983 rn the presence of MRS LYIMO, Learned St atii