19870928 TZHC Mwanza
The appellant failed to account for the collected funds; the receipt produced did not account for the collections, justifying conviction and minimum sentence.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19870928 TZHC Mwanza
- Parties
- Appellant: Msafiri S/O Bujiba; Respondent: The United Republic
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 28 September 1987
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Theft by Public Servant, Minimum Sentence, Appeal
- 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
Msafiri S/O Bujiba
Appellant
The United Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant accounted for the collected funds
- 2 Whether the conviction for theft by a public servant was proper
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant failed to account for the collected funds; the receipt produced did not account for the collections, justifying conviction and minimum sentence.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- conviction and sentence affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
~ ·,1 IN Thi,; HIGH COURT OF TANZANIJ.. M MW.ANZA -.APPELT.Ji.TE JURISDICTION IUGH COURT C:1TIUNii.L APPEli.L N0 0 80 OF 1987 ORIGT..NU, r!RIMINl:L Cl:BE NO. 84 OF 1986 OF TIIill DIST~1IC1' COUR'r OF SDtifGill'-t!ID'.t.A DISTRICT AT SENGE.i.11.Elf.i.ll. Before 3.ll. WENFURE.BE, Esq., District Magistr~te MS:..FIRI S/ 0 BJJIIill3'1i; ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • •••••••• • .APPELL.."Jil'T. versus TIIE UNITED P.EPUBLIC ••••••••••••••••• • • •••••• • ••••••••••••••• RESPONDENT JUDGMENT The appellant wcs 0;_113.rgP-d with stealing by. a person in public serviceo It was on record that ho vas employed l)y Sengerema District Council as a revenue collector. By that vi:rt1.1re ho was given receipt books for the purpose of .collecting r0vonues 0 The receipt books in his possession, one of them was No,.1344151 - 134;43008 On0 day in October 1986 the council's auditor, JoJ:in ivic.1-iy2J11a (PW2), checked the .:ppollant 's accounts and discovered that a total 'of shs.37,500/= wore colloct0d on thut book. By regulations the appellant was bound to remit his collections to the council's treasury and get n receipt, his last receipt h~d to be ste.mped and the treasury receipt numb0rs recorded on it. The 2..uditor saw that the a.ppellant 1 s receipt No.1344300 w2.s stc>mped and receipt No. 1..863203 quotGd on it thus depicting that his collections had been ~ccounted for with the councilrs trecsury. But tho auditor did not stope there, he checked roceipt No • .A863203, to find that it hwi been cancellede no money I arres-cea and c1targea.. n his was received on it. The 2.ppellant was immediately suspected, he was/defence ho said ho had paid the money ho had collected on receipts 1344151 - 300 into the treasury but ho had misplc:.ced tho receipt ho wa.s given._ The trie.1 milfSistrate rejected his defence, convicted and sentenced him to five years imprisonment under tho Minimum Sentences Act. He brought this appeal. He still insists that ho had remitted his collections Shso37,500/= to the treasury and given receipt No. A863203. It was not true that the receipt was cMcelled. Tho appellant doesn't dospute tho fact.that he had collGcted shs.37,500/= on receipt No.1344151 - 1344300. Ilis argument is that he ,accounted for his collections and roceiVOd receipt Noa 863203. This.roceipt was produced in tho trial as exhibit P3. Although I havo had no opportunity to sec it as it has not been brought·to this court, the trial mc:.gistratc had seen it and satisfied 2 th2,t it did not cccount for tho appellant's collections. Therefore he collocte<l Shs. 37, 500/= and put thorn in his pocked. He was rightly convicted and tho sontonco w11s the minimum fixed by law. Tho appeal is dismissed. • JUDGE