19771221 TZHC Mwanza1
The appellant's explanation for possession of the goods was plausible, and lack of a receipt alone does not prove unlawful acquisition. Conviction was not supported by evidence.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19771221 TZHC Mwanza1
- Parties
- Appellant: Rington Kuyalibo; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 21 December 1977
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Conveying Property Suspected to Be Unlawfully Acquired, Burden of Proof, Evidence
- 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
Rington Kuyalibo
Appellant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether failure to produce a receipt proves unlawful acquisition of property
- 2 Whether the appellant's explanation for possession of goods was sufficient
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant's explanation for possession of the goods was plausible, and lack of a receipt alone does not prove unlawful acquisition. Conviction was not supported by evidence.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- conviction quashed
- sentence set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
_Lil 'l1_L~ ILL~'.li C(.;0::'i' O}i'" TANZ.AND'l ' _, PF ~Li,;, 11 ~ ,JUB. r·:;r:r, - ~'11 :'.ON .. 1.c:: :; ·~a:'.i.' C1Uhll·T.~1 ;,pp~~;,L :;e,. 182 OF 1977 (Original Orin.ii,:_,} C::r:;•J Jo. 67 of' 1977 oi' t'. . 0 Ili(,trict Cc,urt of Ngai'a Distrfot ·,t N,;-.;r: o,::dc,L',_: ?, z. IC~,j,li, ..::;sc~4 i llic,t1·ict lVi;::;sistrate) RINGTOH iJDY.;lL:BO~.; ~ ~.;,.,.;;, .-.-~.~ •••••• •-•-·,,.,., •• a , . . . . ,i1PP£:;LL1iN T : : ~ ,:: ,. ·- ·t i \·: .- . , .~__.::...;T! c. ;..:• versus :·,11r.·:.· -~TJ!E---lt~PU}J:i}lf(j~--~ ~\- ~ .- ~ ~--.-.• o·• •:·o "o £1 o ·• -. o·•··· o ... -• • • .) ~- • • • a o" ".:o·-·~ If··. •'f•••R~SPOND.&fr i~ i-'· : . .- : '. :, ~ •, . . _. 2nd Count': I.:::.;c.- 1)i.::i;- frori1 b\dul c;__rnt C:.s c/s 116 of the Por_::l CoC:.e Ca})'• 16 :Jl' tile La,;s. ,-:;-JG''- MF;;Ll-Li.-, -I!.= Tl1c ~,ppolJ.2.nt RINGTOIJ I{iJY,_.-~;,\iO was clrnfgocl with two counts at tl:;.,.:: J:i.st~·ict Coui~t ,':)·:t Nc;21~0. ::Cn t:..:; first ccunt he was charre.l ·,1j_th tho c_:'fcnco of. convoyin'· p::'C-')ffL',t\r--suspccted to have been W1lawf~lly c1cquir0d c,.ntrary to soctic:;~ 312· (1/ (a) cf the ·Penal Code. He i-r"as found [,'Ll.il ty, convicted ond S.::Yl t .:-mc.;;,11?, rtfi) 'l'.lbvon mon"ths imprisonri1ont. In the suc,:,aJ. count; ;,·...) w2s _clit,1,,.:,·.,d>iwiili ''.:§'c-i\ping from I . ... 1' :-,· r.··. \\ ,_, .. I lawful custody contrr::r~r t· s 8ction 116 of t~--i_e, P,~t:.'21 CocL=:t~·- He "},.:JDS acqui tt8d. r11his o.pp,.;':;] j C ,.:_'} ins·t ~C''. nvi::::t ion en t:h,.j: f:±~~:t count. The arr0stinc c/ficc~'' 1Jo.,0\~~'7if P,C. ,>T~IJJ_S~:~ (~~!f:,1rto.ld the trii::l court t~1:t on 2~:,3,T( 11:.J ~a,2:c.cd Ru1..,i,'.:_''J Polic" Station when. he sa;1 the appul - r:.:nt ;,3 cc .' and pr'l,c•'.3,,d cc ',:;rd.s a n:,s,rby gu2st house. The appellant L-'.lS ti,_,n .C'.~1':::'-,r::.nc; G "black t:.:,c, :~;c,r13:j_cw r.c. :ishiwishe susp-3ct.:ill thJ c'_nt:rn~s ,_:r t,:,0 lXJi:, :·c3 lef~ t:te ?-lic<:J :"it1tion followed the appellant nnd stoppad hi~. He told him ta op~~ the bag and show him the cont,:m ts t:10:.:·eof. lL :t'ot.,n..-1 tl-i2 t the -),,:r; c· :"it:: i:1ed an a ssortrnent of clotninc; i:1clwlinc; tr·c,ci:,'-'1's 1 -,)lous-.::s, crc1 s,v::int.:,~~::;. ,ihon qu,Jstioned as to whe~her tc·,~s,:; it!Gl'•._; sis .~,.';U if so ,J1l8.r'v 110 u_;·i:_jd tl1em, t11e appellant told h:i.w he li:1d. :;cL:~; t tLi;;, :o'.t ·hu.wezc, Vi~_J.·c;o. ~'i1is 0xplnnation did not satisfy t .. "G con:;-t-c", ;le ),_1:;_'tj_cu.h1rly ,b\:lc0':<;u c__ .:, :1;'~,0lLrnt producr.Jd no docuruent to 1Jc.:d: ::is cl.:1i, .. ,-; ,0von the· cloth,J;:;. ;1.s; tee:<: him to court. f:ct,C 1,t. ~1is trial, -t:~u 2:Jpollant ropo:;J·.;:J.:. .>:i.s c:laii,,s over tlrnse clothes and addeu. 1 in 0rOfJs-exarnLL tj_un t:-1at· ht\bs :ir,·oGte1 mo1~e1y 1Jccause police thought he had. j_m;_:orteJ. t~:....:se clothes fr'.Jr,1 3u.cu1.1:-':i• Ho,-rnyor_,, tho trial magist.c::tte roj,,;ct,3•J. t~:is_· 0::S::(_iJE:!f_fJ:i.Or.\':t:n<l convict..}(L '.:1:q~i:' ,s:;, ·:> ~ .. ,--···. ~; .. :·-\·. -~ ~,·.··.-· ~-;_. ·.-r :·1·· . 1. ..-:··:.r.:J I c.lo m, ~ t.'.':::.nk"·l:,_:::,Ic'\ier that f,3i-lur-0 to ')rot Llco r.i':" r'ece,ipt _should automctica· ~-J· m,icfr.• ·=r ,)rovo uhlawful nc~ruisition. · li~ I nave stated on-v2:r.icus ocqast,c,1s, if t.::j_s wore t.,.G critorion, .a ½rt of tis ~.ould b·J in for l,)t cf tr~,L'-ble the oxplonction offe_cs:.:ci. by the appellant 4Tas pbusiblo~ ·,t the h::;;-;,,ri:-1:: of this appo:d 1 ;:r. Butarr,-bnla dJg,_.,.nfft· support tho c.tppollant' s ,J:mviction. I agree witl.l him and co'risequently l,'i allow tb3 nppeal, qurt,:, 1 ._ the c·.;nv:iction :rnd set aside the sentence. I ordered ·Le immod.iat"' :tul.3·:'. i;,., o:::· ti10 nppcll_;:rnt i'r91n ;:)rison W1les$:;:;J:le. 1. was otherwise l~wfullv Jjt~ined~ 'I , • •' D0liv0rcd in C L,' '; 2t Nw~nzn ,this 21st '.lay of 0 December, 1977. ~LJi\NZll. 21st D:sc;_;t.,1:LJ. 9 J_ry{'{. JlTDGi;_; t ~s··n