mohamed salehe milinga vs republic 1987 tzca 88 3 july 1987

1ST THE COURT OF APPEAL OF T a n za n ia AT DAR ES-.- SALVAIvl GOTHAM-HYA.IALI; 0 . J . : MAKAME, J .A . And KISANAA, J .A . .. CRTZNAL APPEAL B O .06 OF 1986 M.OHAMED -SA1EHB IHLINGA .................* . . . * . . . . . . . . ............................ APPELLANT v e rsu s THE iffiPUBLIC ......................................................................... RESPONDENT (AN APPEAL from th e judgem ent o f th e High C ou rt o f 'Tanzania a t Dar es Salaam (HON. D*P. MPIGA.NO, J . ) d e liv e r e d on th e 17th day o f Septem ber, 1986, i n Econom ic Crimes Case No: 4 o f 1 9 3 5 ). JUDGErSIT? QF THE COURT NYALALI. Q .J . The a p p e ll a n t MoJbamed S a leh e M ilin g a a l i a s Ilasoud Kassa was j o i n t l y oh arged w ith two o t h e r s i n th e Iiigh C ourt s i t t i n g a s an E conom ic Crimes C ou rt a t Dar es Salaam w ith th e o f f e n c e o f b e in g fou n d i n p o s s e s s i o n o f g ood s s u s p e c te d o f h a v in g been s t o l e n o r u n la w fu lly a c q u ir e d c o n t r a r y t o s l o t i o n 59 o f th e Econom ic and O rga n ized Crime C o n tr o l A c t , 1984 and p a ra gra p h 8 ( l ) ( b ) of th e F i r s t S ch ed u le t o th e Econom ic and O rga n ized Crim e C o n tr o l A c t , No. 13 o f 1984. A t th e c l o s e o f th e p r o s e c u t io n c a s e t h e c o u r t fou n d no c a s e t o be answered by th e two oth ep e who w ere thus a c q u itte d . The t r i a l p ro c e e d e d a g a in s t th e a p p e lla n t who was c o n v ic t e d a s ch a rged and was se n te n ce d t o te n y e a rs im p rison m en t. He was a g g r ie v e d b y t h e o o n v i c t i o n and s e n t e n c e , h en ce t iiis a p p e a l t o t h i s c o u r t . M r, Mwale, le a r n e d A d v o ca te a p p ea red f o r th e a p p e l l a n t , w hereas Mr. S h io , le a r n e d S ta t e A t t o r n e y a p p ea red f o r th e re sp o n d e n t R e p u b lic . Prom th e p r o c e e d in g s i n th e Econom ic Crimes C ourt and i n t h i s C ourt t h e f o l l o w i n g prim a ry and se co n d a ry f a c t s a r e n o t d is p u te d betw een th e p a r tie s . I t i s oommon ground th a t th e a p p e lla n t was a t th e m a t e r ia l tim e a te n a n t a t h ou se No. 5 Mwongozo S t r e e t i n th e c i t y o f Dar es S&laam t h a t on 14/ 5/19 8 5 th e P o l i c e , a c t i n g on in fo r m a t io n r e c e i v e d , s e a rch e d "h ou se N o. 5 and fou n d 24 b a le s o f w h ite k h ak i c l o t h i n g m a t e r ia l i n one room b e lo n g in g t o Shaban ffiruiaba and 4 b a le s o f th e same c l o t h i n a n o th e r room b e lo n g in g t o R ajabu Juna. I t i s u n d isp u ted t h a t n o th in g s u s p i c i o u s was fo u n d i n any o f th e rooms r e n t e d and o c c u p ie d by th e a p p e l l a n t . FW ^herm ore i t i s common ground th a t th e a p p e lla n t was in t e r r o g a t e d ■fey th e P o l i c e a t th e s c e n e r e g a r d in g th e b a le s thus d is c o v e r e d and he and th e two o t h e r p e rso n s were p ic k e d up by th e P o l i c e and taken t o th e P o l i c e S t a t io n w here th e y were ch a rged a c c o r d in g l y . J'rom th e same p r o c e e d in g s i n th e Econom ic Crimes C ourt and t h i s Qpupt i t seems t h a t th e f o l l o w i n g p rim a ry and se co n d a ry f a c t s a r e d is p u te d k%1JW99n th e p a r t i e s . I t is th e p r o s e c u t io n c a s e th a t when th e a p p e lla n t was i n t e r r o g a t e d by th e P o l i c e a t th e s c e n e he .C onfessed t o h a v in g r e c e iv e d th® T jal«s th e p r e v io u s n ig h t from some p e rso n s whom he named, and th a t t h e b a le s w ere b rou g h t t o him f o r s a f e c u s t o d y . I t i s p a r t o f th e p r o s e c u t i o n c a s e th a t a t th e r .n t e r i a l tim e when th e b a le s were fo u n d , t h e y w ere undealj th e c u s to d y and c o n t r o l o f th e a p p e l l a n t , and th a t t h e r e was r e a s o n a b le s u s p i o i o n th a t th e s e 'b a le s had been s t o l e n o r u n la w fu lly ob-fcain$cL On t h e o t h e r hand, th e d e fe n c e c a s e c o n s i s t s o f a d e n ia l o f ijh» c o n f e s s i o n and an a s s e r t i o n t h a t th e a p p e lla n t was t o r t u r e d on th e way t£> P o l i c e S t a t i o n . Furtherm ore i t i s in h e r e n t ly p a r t o f th e d e fe n c e • a s e t h a t t h e a p p e lla n t was n o t i n p o s s e s s io n o r c o n t r o l o f th e b a le s a t 1jhe tim e th e y w ere fou n d by th e P o l i o e , Xhe o r u o i a l i s s u e f o r c o n s i d e r a t io n and d e c i s i o n i n t h i s c a s e is - w h eth er th e a p p e l l a n t was i n p o s s e s s io n o r c o n t r o l o f th e b a le s i n q i\ fetiO n . The t r i a l c o u r t c o n s id e r e d t h i s i s s u e and th e le a r n e d t r i a l t o g e t h e r w ith one l a y member fou n d as c, f a c t th a t th e a p p e lla n t was i n p o s s e s s i o n and c o n t r o l o f th e b a le s a t th e tim e th ey were fou n d by th e P®H*Q# That p a r t o f th e judgem ent s t a t e s and we r e s p e c t f u l l y q u o te b elow : "We have c a r e f u l l y c o n s id e r e d th e e v id e n c e adduced by two P o l i c e o f f i c e r s a s w e ll as th a t p r e s e n te d by th e a ccu sed . We p r e f e r t h a t o f th e p o l i c e o f f i c e r s . We a r c s a t i s f i e d th a t i t i s c r e d i b l e and r e l i a b l e . On th e s t r e n g t h o f th a t e v id e n c e we f i n d th a t th e a c c u s e d was i n c o n t r o l o v e r th e g o o d s . We th in k th a t th e two rooms i n w hich th e b a le s were k e p t w ere a v a i l a b l e and a c c e s s i b l e t o him a t th e m a t e r ia l t i n e , e i t h e r by a s p e c i a l arrangem ent o r by u se and w on t'1. The two p o l i c e o f f i c e r s m entioned i n t h is judgem ent a r e W 1 and PW3. 3J h eir e v id e n c e o o n cern ed th e f i n d i n g o f th e b a le s i n th e two rooms o c c u p ie d b y t h e c o - t e n a n t s o f th e a p p e ll a n t , and co n c e rn s th e a l l e g e d c o n f e s s i o n o f •the a p p e l l a n t . M r. Mwale, le a r n e d A d v o c a te o f th e a p p e ll a n t , has s t r o n g l y a t t a o k e d t h e s e v iew s o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t on t h i s i s s u e on th e ground t h a t t h e e v id e n c e l a i d b e f o r e th e c o u r t does n o t e s t a b l i s h t h a t th e a p p e lla n t was i n p o s s e s s i o n o r o o n t r o l o f t h e b a le s i n q u e s t io n . We th in k th e r e i s m e r it i n th e s u b m is s io n made by U r. I " v a le . Had th e b a le s o f c l o t h been fo u n d i n th e room s o c c u p ie d by a p p e l l a n t , th e f i n d i n g o f th e t r i a l c o u r t w ou ld h ave been u n a s s a i l l a b l e , b u t a s i t i s , th e b a le s o f c l o t h w ere fo u n d i n rooms o o c u p ie d by o t h e r t e n a n t s . There i s a p resu m p tion i n la w u n d er s e c t i o n 122 o f th e E v id e n ce A c t , 1967 th a t th e o c c u p ie r o r o c c u p ie r s o f t h o s e rooms w ere i n p o s s e s s io n o r c o n t r o l o f th o s e b a l e s . I t is o f c o u r s e a p resu m p tion w hich can b e r e b u t t e d , b u t i s t h e r e any e v id e n c e t o r© bu t t h i s p resu m p tion ? Does th e r e p u d ia te d c o n f e s s io n a l l e g e d l y made by t h e a p p e l l a n t p r o v id e suoh r e b u t t a l? Such a r e p u d ia te d c o n f e s s io n r e q u i r e s t o b e t r e a t e d w ith caujtm n i n a c c o r d a n c e w ith a w e l l e s t a b lis h e d r u l e b e f o r e i t i s a o t e d upon ( s e e th e c a s e o f A l l SALEHS HSUTU v . R (l9 8 0 ) T .L .R . p . and TUWAMOI v . Ufcanda (1 9 6 7 ) E ,A . p , 9 1 ) . .<re can f i n d no c o r r o b o r a t i v e ■ t»f' ■ 1■ ■■u ^ -----------------5 e v id e n c e i n t h i s c a s e , and s i n c e th e b a le .i were fou n d i n th e rooms o c c u p ie d b y o t h e r te n a n ts , we ca n n ot th a t th e r e p u d ia te d c o n f e s s io n o f th e a p p e l l a n t ca n n ot b u t be t r u e . It fc llo -x t lr e r e fo r e t h a t th e r e p u d ia te d • o n fe s s io n i s . n o t s u f f i c i e n t to r e b u t th e presu m p tion th a t th e o c c u p ie r s o f t h e room s i n q u e s t io n r* a r e presumed t o have been i n p o s s e s s io n o r c o n t r o l e f th e b a le s i n q u e s t io n . U ndoubtedly th e o o c u p ie r s o f t h e s e rooms i f tUm&Qent w ould have -p rovid ed th e n e c e s s a r y r e b u t t in g e v id e n c e . S u p r i s i n g ly n e i t h e r H r. 3haban Mkunba who was somewhere i n D ar es Salaam a t i t h e m a t e r ia l t i n e , n o r th e s a id R a ja bu Juma, whose w i f e waa p r e s e n t a t th e m a t e r ia l t i n e , were c a l l e d t o g i v e e v id e n c e a t th e t r i a l . I f th e y w ere in n o c e n t , one wonders why th e y w ere n o t o a l l e d t o g i v e e v id e n c e a t th e t r i a l . In th e l i g h t o f t h e s e c ir c u m s ta n c e s t h e r e i s a r e a s o n a b le b dou bt a b o u t th e p o s s e s s io n o r c o n t r o l o f th e b a le s i n q u e s t io n . We a r e t h e r e f o r e bound to i n t e r f e r e w ith th e d e c i s i o n o f th e c o u r t b e lo w . But b e f o r e we do s o , we have t o c o n s id e r th e p o s i t i o n o f th e 28 b a le s o f c l o t h i n g m a t e r ia l. O b v io u s ly on th e f a o t s o f t h i s c a s e th e a p p e lla n t i s n o t th e la w fu l ow ner. I t a ls o seems d o u b t fu l on th e b a s i s o f th e p r o c e e d in g s o f t h i s c a s e , th a t any o f th e o ccu p a n ts o f th e rooms where th e b a le s w ere fou n d i s th e l a w f u l ow ner, o t h e r w is e he o r sh e would have come t o sa y s o i n c o n n e c t io n w ith th e s e p r o c e e d in g s . The i n t e r e s t s o f j u s t i c e r e q u ir e t h a t t h i s c o u r t s h o u ld n o t make an o r d e r w hich w i l l r e s u l t i n t h e s e goods f a l l i n g i n c r im in a l hands, o r w hich would d e p r iv e th e la w fu l owner o f th e o p p o r tu n it y t o cla im th e g o o d s . F or t h e s e r e a s o n s , we t h in k th e p r o p e r o r d e r sh ou ld be one made under th e p r o v i s io n s o f S .4 4 o f th e P o l i c e F orce;. O rd in a n ce, Cap 322 w hich w i l l g i v e o p p o r t u n it y t o t h e la w fu l ow ner, i f a n y, t o p ro v e h is c la im . I n th e a b s e n c e o f su oh p r o o f , th e p r o p e r t y o r p r o c e e d s o f th e same s h o u ld b e d e a l t w ith a s p r o v id e d ui^ier s e c t i o n 4 4 (4 ) o f th e same O rd in a n ce. I n th e f i l i a l a n a l y s i s t h e r e f o r e we a l l o w th e a p p e a l, quash th e c o n v i c t i o n , s e t a s id e th e s e n te n c e and d i r e c t t h a t th e a p p e lla n t b e r e l e a s e d from j a i l fo r t h w i t h u n le s s d e ta in e d t h e r e i n f o r o th e r la w f u l c a u s e . We f u r t h e r o r d e r t h a t th e 28 b a le s o f c l o t h i n g m a t e r ia l i n q u e s t io n be t r e a t e d a s u n claim ed p r o p e r t y under t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f ^ Q o tio n 44 o f th e P o l i c e P o rce O rd in a n ce, Cap 322 a s amended by t h e G rirajaaJ-'jroeedu re A ct', 1985. / \ ( P . I . FIALALI ) CHEEP JUSTICE ( L . M. MAKAME ) JUSTICE OP APPEAL ( R. H. KISAFGA ) JUSTICE OP APPEAL I c e r t i f y t h a t t h i s i s a t r u e co p y o f th e o r i g i n a l