19881116 TZHC Dar es Salaam

AT Di.R }S SJJ;~)I ~ELL]:£E JUlUSDlCTIQN HIGH COURT CR.ThiINii.L .i~PPE..ili. N0 .. 4?/81 (ORIGINili CRIMIN.[Ji CM:! no. 191 OF 1986 OF T.H8 DISTRICT COURT OF M.OROGORO DISTRICT , J.,T !,10ROGORO BE~RE :~~ R~ MJ,.NENTO ESQ • RESIDENT MLGISTRJTE Ni.SORO HJ.GONGO ~ ~. ~ •. ~;,. ~; ~;;; • ~ ~ • ~ ~1~:PPELL.tJJT (Original /.ccused) versus TID U1UTED BEJ?UBLIC..~ • ~ •••••••• ~ • ~ ~ .RESJ?ONDENT ( Original Prosecutor) JUDGl\iENT The appellant, Na,ssoro Magongo, Wf.• coiw:i.cted ef burglary and s·beal:\,ng • He was sentenQed to three years imprisonment in the firsi:; count and tvtelve months imprisonment in the second oount~ to be servE: co:1.currently. He now appeals~ The evidence against the appellant was wholly eircumsta.ntial·~ In her evidence, the compla.inant 1 :ew·,1 Mariam Abdallah, said that the appellant used to oce upy a room '-n Mar:i.em' s house. Then c.fter about one year the appellant left and went to 1ive elsewhere. One day at about :5 pm. the appeJ.lant went to the house and asked Mariam to go to her daughter's house as she was allegedly required \.l., the:re .. l1Ia.riam re:t'used to go·, The appellant went away, At abo~t 11 pri·. 9 the I appellant again went to 11'.iariGlll s house and asked Mariam to go to the house of one Shaban·. Again Mariam refused, The appellant deci(~ed to ·, go e,ws.y, Later, during th$ night, Mariam woke up and found that the door of her house was open and a ·radi~ was m:f.ssing in the ho 1"1se. She suspe,:ted th2 appellant who was subsequently arrested and char.:~ed. The stolen radio was not recovered. The appellant denied tli0 ch3.rge arid he has repeated that denial in his petiti~n of appea,1.·; i~S I observed earlier, the whole prosecution evidence is baszd on the fact that the appellant had visited the oomplaina.nt's ho:.i.se hours before the theft was discovered that night. The evidence is ther0fore wholly circumstantial'. Do the facts lead to the j.rresistible inferancc of guilt? It is in evidence that when the appellant ·:1ei1.t to the complaint's house at about 11 pm. , he did not enter the house. Ee spol~e from outside the house and when the cemplainant opened the door 1 ' the appellant went away. So, the oomplainant closed the door and went to sleep, Can it be said that the theft which was committed later in Is it :·.iJt ~1ost::ible for someone elze to ho.Ye gone to the hou.se v.rhil,::i -cl1e :oompla.i.l:JlUlt slept and broke into the house? I think~ 2.nyone o-t~?.X' tl12,n the appellant could have committed t:1e offence. I say so because the appellant went a-way after the complainant refused to leave hn~ house. The complainant said specif;ically tbat when she opened the d'.:lo~.. the a1)pellant went awa::i~ He did not enter the house. It is quite possible, therefore, that after the appellant went away and the complainant locked herself in the room, someone else went there t1,ake into her house and.· stole th0 radio. Before t..11e c.ou:rt convicts on VJholji circum.stant;i.al· evidence, i·': must bG satisfied that the inculpatory facts are in-compatibls Hit . the in:riOC 13l.J.Ce of the a~used and in capable of explanation 1J.pon p;." / other hypothesis than that of a.ccu.sen. 1 s gu:i.lt..S.e-€ Rt V. Kir.,lceri,.,r:: _.-:.. . .::.: ... - Koske 19i:9 in this case cannot be said to be incompatible vrith tts in;1ocence of the appellant. It is not knovm wheri exactly the, t:,o. -~ cornui tted. It was at night and it may have been many hours after the a;;pe~l0nt h.::;d gone awa:y. The appellant is not the only pei~sor. who could h,wo gone to the house. .Anyone else could have gone t~1f :.~-: long af·ter the appellant had left. The appellant was arusted a.nd subsequently convicted on suspecic ..~ only• He was suspected because of his visit to the complainant 1 s h.y1 when he stood out side the house - and. then went away. So it v1c.s th6 1 the appellant r,1ay have returned to the house later. that night and he broke into the house and stole the radio. The complainant herself said specifically that she reported to the chainnan that the appel lar.i-.: 11 was a suspect. 11 Suspecion, hovrever storng, is not a basis for a conviction. In this case 9 the re was no conclusive evidence ag~.inst , the appellant and the trial court convicted him on mere suspcc:Lon; I entirely agree with the learnod State Attorney who declined to support the conviction. '.I·he prosecution failed to prove the charge a.i;c,L1f;t the appellant and the conviction cannot .sta;-icL The appeal is allowed. The conviction is quashed a,nc~ ths sentenc.l:l is set Mide. U:nless the appellant is lawfully held in so:w.e other rn.atte.;r·s, he should be released from custody forthwi·ch.' l~~-- w. J; MiJNA JUDGE MOROG-OP.0 24th November.- 1987 Lppellant - absent? Idalabat Ste.,te Ji.t..torney, for the Republic. ~/13 fll)fVlj DJ TiD HIGH CODilT OF T/J.TZ.t.JHL J~T DJ:.:;.l JS Sil.JJ'J..I L.PP:::JLLLT:J JlJ~ISDICTIOE HIGH COURT CRJJ'.ID:TLL 1:P?:.~.LL NO,. 48 OF 198 7 OJlIGilTl.L Cilil~IlT1..L CJ:B:J NO o 124 OF 1986 OF TIC DISTRICT COU;.lT OF no~-:.oao~-:o DIGTl1ICT LT EO~:.OGOIW Before Go!,I., SIIILOGILD, :Jcqo 1 DfotJ. ict rrc.ci::::trcto 0 }Il.)/.Z I f,'.IBO}TIJJ~o I o o o o o o • • o • o o o o o o o • o o o o o o o o o c o o o o o o o. o o o o o o o o l.,?:[):JLL.tJJT · ( 02ir).r.;:,,l :. .ccunocl) vornue TED u'1TIT:c:D .RDPUJ3Lic .. o • ... o • o • . . . . . o •• • • • • • • • • • • • • o • • • o o ..... lli"JS?O£m=rr:rT ( Oricind l'ronocutor) J1JDG!\L:"Ji.TT MJ.J?IG..'JT~ J • Tho o.:,_-:;polh·nt Nbozi li11)onoo. bn..i:l 2-l):i;.,02.lod. nce,inet l:.i::i con-dotion for robbce;;,:· ui tl:. violonoo- contrf."..:':' to ooctionc 285 ;:mc1.. 286 of tlic ?onc"..l CoC.oo pz,oforrod. o..r;o..inct l-:.ir.i c,llo:;-ocl tJ.1r-..t ho c..ncl ono :I:o..t:.. ick Sc,lo:·.1o.ni l"""cl 2..)::-,liocl 0 ~-,,ctuc,l 7iolcnco to on8 Il.or.1ioon IcLoncouc, in or:J.01° to otoc,l hie 'boloncinc;c: c~1c: ncl:inc 2,w2.y with tllon. :Pat:dck Solor.1cni m.,D c,oqyittoclo Tl:o convlci.nc.nt cc..vo ovidonco fo1~ tl:o r~::osocut:i_on,. left tic lcouco o,t 2..·bout 6 2, 0 Do c11cl 1mlkocl tc1J~·cls tho buo stc,;.'ld 2.t Moc;1Vu :j.r.c il'.ioro,-:;oro nunioi:,)e,li t::l ul:.oro Le intomlocl to 0oc.1xl c, buo bovncl for De.:i~ oc Sc-,lr,-;.," • 1-11:.on l,o roe..cJ·.ocl t~~o buo stcncl ho e2..w th'oo non otr',nclinc,;o uttcrin:.; c, wo1°d tho;:io tlu'.'OO rn.m e,ttnckocl l:in 1-ri th pc..n[;C,Do wdcl, c..ncl hie in tho conpc.ny of 2, ;;iolico;:.1ono 1. fou Dil:11.1..tcc lr,to:c tl:.c 2,:9:pollQ.llt ccno to tho ncono 2,ncl b.o wc,o 2,loo q,prol::.onclcclo ccllod. Nc:,fulu on tho c.c.;;/ of tho rolibcr;/o for Nd'ulu on t'..:o ccno cl~\yo not r_,ontion tho tir.10 vl:cn ho :Jot out foj_' 1Ic..fnlu., Tho o,:.;ipollo..nt I o c:.ofcncc 00Dr.1ittocl tho l".D tl:o "t:.:id :.12,e5iGt:rdo ::;ro:;_,o:cly c:.i:;. octod hineclf in l.~iD jucl0ncnt J. c..tocl 0 21/11/86, tho wLolo co,co roctocl on tl:c icl. ontific,,tion of tlle; 2.:;;i:.1ollcnt e11c1. Li:: co-c,001.wocl 1:>Jr tto cor:plc..incnto c,;1cl o..o we ~:2..vc :Jeon tho offoncc HC..f.l ccicl to >.c..crc td;:cn ::il:::-,oo e,t 6 2-onG T!:.c 00000()/2 - 2 - licht in Ho::..·oc,'oro fo1· ono to ~100 c,nd ic.ontif3r· 2, ri~raono f"lO 1rn;J oc:.tiofioc.l thnt tl:o c:.,,:;,:iollcnt uc.,a coJ:roctly idontifiodo · Hi tb rocn.rc1.. to Po.t:-ick t).10 . t l"a, t 0 C..CCO:J t OCl t 1.0::.0 2,.,.J. 1 oc.rnccc" Dc,_:-;10 · 1 '1)J. . :::;nyJ.nC? . ,~,., ·. rl· ,,_, ll'l ~t CCc9 .. J.C._, , t1--~t •.•. , .,..~t·•"· 1.-.. .I..:., .1. .,_Q':, ]::,,e,cl loft Hm:-oco:..·o for r:Iciulu c.;[; 7 UoDo Tho:.:-o ic only ono [;1.'01;md ,,:,ich bOG.l'O con:::ddo:cr,t ion in tJ:io 2-)poc;l ,.nd it io in fino tl:io g the,t tho loc..l'ncc.. DL.. iotcc,tc o:;:roc. :l.n f:Lm'..in(; t>.o r\ul': 11:::.:.-r::. (inil t;r of' tho offonco in ·;,rim-; of tJ:o fe,ct t:·.r,t ho 1 :.ci\. in offoct fo1..md. c..t t:.:o 02no tine tL::,t tho co-o..ccu;:,o('.. we,:::; niokJ:cnly iclontifio~lo tho convictione idontifiod.c In l:iG vimr tLo loc:rnccl l'.12,,:~ict~cc,to ohoulcl not b:!,7C e,0001)toc.l.. tLo l)cro cllocction of tho co-c.,counocl thr,t 1:.u 1rr,o :::.t fa:.fv.lu c,i tl:.o tiDo tl:.c offo:10, we,c coLmi ttodo So in Lio viou tho .::oqP.itk,l of tl:o co-r,co1..!c.:oc: wno ,r.;:-cnco r,t tb.o tiDo tho offence uco conei ttoc1., me.:. Gi1.-on tLo fi;,,ct thr,t tl·:o conplc,in,,,,1t to :.."Ulo out Ql'lJT poaGibili t;r of ,, ;·_:i,Jklrnn iclontificr,tiono fiod thr-,t tho o.,1,1)ollont W[',G :i_)=:o:;::io:rl;r convictccl ,.nc1 tJ. .0,t Lio conviction oI:ov..J.C. 0 provo.,ilo In tho ci}~cun:::tru10ca thio 2,:;::,por,l fcilo in its onti:...~oJ.y ~1(7.. Dolivo:rodo Jl,1DCC 16/11/88