19890222 TZHC Dar es Salaam
- Citation
- 19890222 TZHC Dar es Salaam
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 22 February 1989
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 22 February 1989
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The conviction was upheld on the basis of recent possession of stolen property, but the sentence of 10 years' imprisonment was found to exceed the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate, who could only impose a maximum of 5 years for the offence.
Court disposition
conviction upheld, sentence varied
Orders
- Appellant to serve 5 years' imprisonment for housebreaking and stealing, sentences to run concurrently
02
Material facts
Parties
Saidi Ally s/o Kitimwema
AppellantRepublic
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Original Sentence (housebreaking): years 10
- Original Sentence (stealing): years 2
- Sentence After Appeal (total): years 5
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the conviction for housebreaking and stealing was supported by evidence beyond reasonable doubt
- 02
Whether the sentence imposed was within the jurisdiction of the District Court
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The appellant argued that the conviction was based on insufficient and unreliable evidence, that the items found were his property, and that the police manipulated the case due to personal animosity.
- Respondent
- The respondent maintained that the conviction was proper based on the evidence of recent possession of stolen items and that the appellant failed to provide a credible explanation for their possession.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Penal Code, Section 294(2)
Doctrine of recent possession
- 02
Criminal Procedure Act, Section 170(1)(a) and 170(2); Minimum Sentences Act, No. 1 of 1972
Sentencing jurisdiction of District Magistrate
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The conviction was upheld on the basis of recent possession of stolen property, but the sentence of 10 years' imprisonment was found to exceed the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate, who could only impose a maximum of 5 years for the offence.
Obiter and limits
- Justice delayed is justice denied, but this is only relevant where circumstances warrant appellate intervention.
Court disposition
conviction upheld, sentence varied
- Appellant to serve 5 years' imprisonment for housebreaking and stealing, sentences to run concurrently
Source and reliance status
TZHC · 22 February 1989
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TZHC
Judgment· 22 February 1989
:5: . - r1OROCOriO ~ . AFPEL:J.TJ; JiJJ.LDICTION IIIG:l COTTRr CJ.IlUlJAL AFTEAJ.., NO. 92 OP 1987 CrtIGIHAL CRil-UHAL C•.WE NO~ 151 OF 1980 Cf' TEE DISTRICT COT.;-':i:-G: ·OF J::ILC.3i. DISTRICT P.7: :i~IL03.A }3:.:;.:'ORE :r. -~-~< fYJ'.llBOGi:.. ESQ,. 7 :DIST?..IC:;_- 1.fL•]:tSI'R:..T.J· SAIDI ALLY s/o ~ITI·IIlrra·~1.A.« " 0 1) 0 ft 6APPELLA.lPJ: e O . 0 0 <1°d O ,. ( Original Acc 1.1-2~d.) ( Original Pros,:;cv:iio:r) -lii'lc District 001:,.r-:; o~: KiJ.osa, Kilosa District 9 contrary to Soctio;.\ 294(1) o:( t:... c Pc-mal Cod.e. and sJce2,:Ling contra.ry to 0 cc·~::_o:;. t' 265 ·of ·che Penal Code. L.e w2.D co:.-1victcd cf ·:::otl,. tl1~ coviYGS ancl s-:mtenced, ·:;o 10 yearG and 2 ye'::l.rs im1):i:-isonme1:.·i; : 3sp~'c-ci·,.;-·cl;_y· 9 a:..1c1. ·i;;·,,; sentencen ·wr:;re or(.8rC:(~. , 1·: to :nm conc1,u~rently. The let· ac·:ns,j!.:, '.f1~.-o;-i12,a :M:zibond.a was co;.1yic·0.ed eJ.oi:.::: w'i th -tho a,ppollant :,110. was scn-~enccd. ::or the s22ne perio,l o:f impr'isomnent. The 3rd accused. waD ·l;l,.e wife o-.i:' ·c::·.o· am)ella.1Y~ 7 1Jy the nai.11e of Asha Musa, s::10 w2:s acqt;.ittecl. on ·rJot1. the co1..:11·i.;s~ The fi:;;st acc:::.s,:.:<l _ap;ieal8cl alone to thic cot.1-1'-t and ti:10 appeal was 9 a£te:.:· :,eing he2XcJ. l;y Jhaveri 1 Ar-:;" Jv.d.gc ( as :w 'c'... ,.LJ. . was) dis!nissed ~or bsing u.:o.me:;::i'iio;is. Tho s0nt0nc<::B 1wre }:'oi;.nd. to be
adeqt;:.~~-::c T'ne prese1,:c appel.La.,.vi-i; sent b.is Iuerno:c.::.nclu..111 of." appeal Oi'l 23rd Dr,0e2.bcr~ J.:;03 to the iligh Court. Ap:i;:,eal waf..: on ·i.;im,./ as t!.1e 2,ppella..nt g2v0 notiee of appeal on 26tL August 1 1981, a <'la;y 9 Jc,,~it ;,d:·cor he Wc.\S co;1vic·~ed. .on 25-c;., kc::.gu.st, 1981. The appellar1t received copies o:.: ·proceedings and jud.5enent on 1st DE::oesber 9 19,83 .:.111.t his merJo:r.e,nd.1.1.,!1 of aPfJeal was received a;.1cl filec,l I-1:; is not lu1owl1 w.:iy the me;nor2J1durn o:f appeal. w2,8 delayed. too long -~o l'cac:1 Ligh C01.,1.rt 3 Dar es Salaam.. It wa,s also 1,.;.·J.:fort·1,;.nat8 ·ct.2:li the appea.l co,~lcl not b;::: her.rd il.::mecliataly bec 0,use the original record. o1 the ease was also? of oouxse inadvertently 7 dela;:reG, C to r2a,c;:t ·i:;lle Rig:::. 01rrt4 Indeed, this a,101::ntcd to "jv..stice dela;y-ed is ~j-c:..f::ticc clenied 7 :i b,_,t thj_s :;,a: :im woulcl ·be C[L,.ii;G releva1ri; in situa/Gions whore -~he ciJ:·cumstances would warrant the appoL.atc court to a1low -~he ap:.\ea,1 9 ancl . ., , -·' ,.. • • .- • • • -~ I"- ·,t, • - 2 - ?..}.)pclla-lie cov..rt -to ;J.a,·-·r u:;.1cl rl~s,osc. of any v:at. ~8r ~·;cforG i~~ 2.:ac~ :i:C :.c i.,.i1 8.:G::;rial ·w~J_o·~l:or or 11ot t11e pa;..~tics arc ~Jroue:i.1::; b.-c t:_~.G ~1e,:'xir1c;- pro\riclecl ·ch~1.t their rij:•.t o::.' -;:,,::ing :~cc.rel 1:.i.2,:.1 no·'.;
~JG0n C.,,nioc'.. On ap:,_-1eal, t:le ::,:i.c;> co1-irt ~ al t:·,.::n;_j:i. sit·ci1~G° 1.:11c'..er "i;:_, c po1rnr0 oonfe:r-rec. on it by Sootior1 366 o:~ ,. Criminal .A.ct, it sa::,r act as a cou:;.•"i; sittin3" o:r1 it.:i• revision.al j·,,ri8rlic·l;ic:.i and c1i:1,mce t:10 '.J,3;rco;.1cc vidc soc ...;ion 373( l) o:':' t:10 Cri;,inal Proo3d1,.r::: Act., In otl1er v-ro:rc. . .s>' al-t~-~ot1. fl'l t::-.s a-;,pcllz.n·~ ;nav b.a.:'"/e co:.-1p~.ct.)d ser-vii1g ~-~is/ • ,, .... c~· · (l.··1 ....l.JJ..!.l; J. JC. . , J _; af,_;>Oal I ·;;;_,o:ce;.or·e c':.iroctod -~:12.t tho Republic s;.10:,:ld. D.I'f,1.1.0 tL.r~ v.p,.J:.::,.2. E\n~ le;;:,,vo the ~;1at·';c:r :i:or t::i.0 co·c:rt to decide. T;;_o G.P:'.:aL E.l,ffC list8(~ S JTO:.mc..s of a.~pcal but I will St.Ui}I'.;a.rise ·.;;.10,,1 in one lot"' ho clains ·c'.,.at t:. . , Di:::rc:;:-ict c01.1.:rt erred in convictin::; t::..,-:: appclla.::t o::.,. a ·chin cvide:;.1:Je 1ihic'. L die,. no·~ ;:,::·o-;,re a;;,,.inst :i.1is in.1oco,100 .ie~roml I'8c'.80ll:J,blo Cco~·.bt • Socone,"..ly th:,.t t:i..,.c ,_;;vid.e:.:.t,~O ac.-,,.i:1s-c hi::i was Jc]:,.a:~ o:~· to the conclusion that :;.o was one 0:·. t].:.o burclc·.:.:·s. Fourthly, the articloc, naiuely, tho ·c2 ~jlo clo·cll and t:'.:.0 ·c1ro :~ o:::.·~.:s :fo· nc, in '.:.is ro:'m 9 t]ie ap:ricll2.:i.1t clai:as t).•.v.t t:.1cy arc his l)rop::L·c~,. •T:12:i; the police c:.o.:•.1god tho story to
;:~a..,::; it appe2-r that the: thing,-, ·belong to -~Lt,:; complc.ina;.1.t (PW .. 5) in orcler to victimise hir.1 ( af'l)ellant) for r02.son ·c:1::,;i:; the a 1;:;·•Glla..'1.t was complaining ti.1at '1is wife had pr::::vio .:::;ly a;:;socia;ccd wi·~:: one oi' tl:to police mcm,, Fo1-1..l'.'·i;::.,l3r and lastly t:w ap~-ellant clains t:1; ,;b t:1::re was no evidrJ::cc s:10wn at t)1s -~ri2.:.. It wc1,s o:,1ly taken for &,"l'antocl, he cloth belonged to the complainant because such i'bc;,10 are corruon and. can ·;ie -this appeal. T:iere are only three poin,;;s for considoo.'ation ancl cbcision in t,:us o,_: -.:, :.: ~ (1) ·• .,. 1 ...... • • . - 3 - (3) If' t'..~e pnswor in two is 2.L:o ;;:,::·:::irr..:.\tiY·o, tl1 .a.t is con,~ictio::.1 w;,.r:,; co0.:;._· ... ~ras the. nc::..;.te:ncc tl'Titii...11. tb.e :\-~=·~: rJC:.ic·t:1.011 o:t t:.\0 Diot:.:-ict Co1.}..:ct? Soptenb-3r, 1980 a...7.C:. thie·,rns entered t>.eroin a11rl loot:::d >cu:::;o-holcl i t,.::;-:,s w1J.::..c .. t;:i.c cor!lpl2.:j.na::.1:c, P,W. 5, 2,:'1d. ]}.is 1·ri:..>? pW. 1 :;_;-:,.1:i; t!ie: ·:,-alv.o -~o S}1s. 16, 616/50., For t:..10 )t:.:f:'poso of -t!1is ju.~[.,oc0nt it I s poin·:;less to list d.ow;1 tl1e thing;:1 w::-.ich were desc1·ibod. in tho clla,r_zc S~:.O -~t to ha,() boe::a :T1;0Lm, :,:·or I a.::1 o::ly concc::rned }ri'Gll tho The i tens t,or•c: two t2:b10 Lorks and 0110 table cloth. In the
morninc following •i;>c -;)1:.r. 6 112.r~,r and GtGalil1g, police wore iu:':'oJ:aod a..."l.cl invosti(',c:1,tio:::.i started. In -~:1e course uf t~J.G inv.::rsiiig"'tion ancl aetinc; on a tip t:::ie a;.1pellan-~ 1s ).,.uuGo w3r3 in:,2 ..cd by police :.:.nder a soai·cl1 war:rant4 '.2l1e t-:m cell lea.dar of tb.c a..rca? ·one Ifo:.: .2.ned Ra;"b.i6.i (P~·T o4) Has 81.-'..'illilo1wd by -:;ho 1 The police were looking lo:~· articlou darrving tho dosc:riT,)tions o? t:10 articles tb.o co:nnL1inc1nt 112.cL 0 . - described to t~10 police to lla ,, o he,,n stolen. · In the appolla..'lt I s lwnse? a ta,hlo c],oth ancl two :for~;::::: woro v.:noa.rthed. Upon in-corrog2,tion as :1ow t~:o appol:'..ant got tho :forks and tc.'.3lo cloth, at firct J wore give:i;:i. to his wife by one Apollo,. lie again changed. tho Gto:ey a.l'lcl saicl or s:101-r tt,.e wJiereabouts o~: Apollo or Abdul, llc reversed his sta..tff.:,onts? -:,:~.is tir.ic act:1ittin[.,; :chat.they w~(E_c l.1.is '.·an property w:1ic1.1• he alleged to h;.,,·o bought at l:Isicbazi gtree.:!/:Da.r cs Salclar:1., T.... is h.tter stoi-:v was repoe,tcd in tl,.c ap_:;Gl;l.ant I s sworn sta/1.iC;.1cnt at t'..10 trial~ T;.:.o a:; eL ant 7s 1-Tii'o 7 on t'..:..o oth:.:r ;:iantJ., ga ,·o. cv-i.:-:.onc0 i:,.1 h~r o,;n clo;'.ience as -clw 3rrl accu.::;ed at the trial con·cradic'cing wb.at t:ie appelJan"c stated. tb.c appellanto She a3kod her
hi..,Sband where he go·t; t',.o -t~_:,:i.ngB? c:1.nd accor:hn,::; ·::o he:,: evicle,nc0? tho. a);.)clJ.a.11t tol,:'.. h')r -;;;_,.at sho bo· ,c;::t tllo;.!1 i'ron nu:nembo s0L;_,:;i• 11 rrho appe],lant I s wi::?u sir.,:Jly toll: ·i;l!.0 ·:;1•ial co1..:rt ·1;>.::i:~ r..;lie wa:-J r.,e:;~.:-oly join.cc.:. in t;:w c4arc;o lnc..:,.uso o~: the appellant I s s·cc::.tc~,1cnt that t:'::w t:~.in:;z belim_;-:::cl to h::i:r~ Sb,o d01:iod l::nowlcdgo of the t>.ingu a..nd of Apollo or Abdul. The Cou.r·i; :fc··t:1.d. aG i1 f',wt t:'.:.w.t r:ihc was onJ.;yr inplica/1,Gd for ·1;he salce oi it,. and accruittod her~ and. ..... .. '-· .... - qt:ootionc ·-·. .. ·•, ·- -·' ......,,_~ .,. ~ weJ~o :fo~111.d. wi-c:1 ·0;.1c ap:,ellant ·i;2,lJ.ierl wHh -.:;.. e i.ic~r:,:s, ,~,i;.;:0 anC.. colour of' t:::.e art:i.cles sci, ,_!d f:'roi,: th::; apy,cl1a11.t I s llGusq ( 2 ~ -~hu a~pollant I s wi::·o gave ovide:100 01.::;;:>lair..ing- how ·t/1,-:J -:;: .. :cn::r... cx-.1 c to -;;· ... cir :,01•.;;:;c aZlc::. und.oub·:;cG.::.y appollrurc' o 01-rn stoI-y as !1ow :he acC[l,irod ·i;;10 t>: . n 0 ,:; r2.iscd e, roason.::.cl::a stolon on 29-;;h Sci:tor:,bcr, 1980 n:.1cl uero :Zo~nd. ia tlto _appollaJ1t I s !101.~.se on 7"i;;i· ifovcribcr, 1]30., C:;_1e discovery of ti'~to thil1:~·:; W8,S tl;.roL·.jl a r, C·. 5 ::;.:;,ring bGci1. stolen, I pros,J.i.,J 9 .t:'..c L::.•,~.::1.ccl trial JJist:t:ict
]~ci,gi;:.;-cr:.,;:.; 7 2.l·:;llour~1 h., did no·c ::;cn-'.;ioil in ~-.iG jl:(.co;:·:c:./..;, i:1.volrnr". ·t;:1.0 C::.nc·~::i:·i110 o:': rcc.or1t po3scr-.,uio11 ~co co~: cot tlHJ a~v~1el~~ai1t 7 sq. .(aroly 1roll 5 \ 1-ritl1 ·G:!...i.c t:;i:; Penal Law, Soctio;.1 294(2), =:owcvcr, ur1~.Gl' -t;;_-c CrinL1.al Proccclrn.~:-; J.,,·'ci , J 5G5 Section 170 ( 1) (a)· 2, m~bordiloF;:;c co: :_:ct is ai:·0:.iorizod ·i:o f)aDs i.1 L,u:-i1::-:.::·.: ofi:onco o:f ~T_,J;l~la.i.7 con-i:;r ::rJ to Scntio:1 294 o::· V.:.o Fcnal Cou...; :'.'or a 9c:. io(. 0 not lon,.i t 1-.:.1;.1 fi ;:re, ;yc:,1,r;:.;, "Gnt-.:r- -~: .c CriniL.n.1 Proccturc Ac·c -~::c lI;:.,.'.;i.:J·c:.i.·:-.tc ha.cl a limit ,..,:[ c>.·'1t .xos+:G ~}.-Di;,;.'~...:oa.:0 (.,_-·id.c sedio:aJ.70(1 )(ci,) of Crir::i::.ial P~iocorlltro AG"~ - If ;_10 iL1po2.:.:d a pricon so~·~·:;,_,nco o:i: ;-;;ore t\a,: Q yoa:c'S ~ ~10 1 w:., •.h . h;:v8 c:.:::ccedod ~1is juris2.ic tion 8-i'.lC'. ·011 · -~ oc::'.tc;.1cc woulcl ·c:·. e:::·8foro be iL~c:-,2.L A,:,·ain 9 ;3octioI1 170 (2) or Crimi:..1.al Proct)d. .::i:·,1 Ac·':. u:-,rns ff,:cb.. ci, t:..tc stz.t,.·:·i;o:ry L1L1J:.1;:~-::1 SC\ntonoo p:.o·,ic~ocl ,.-:.n,:;~cr t:.. c ::~iai:..:TLC.1 Sc11tc:.1cos Act, No .1 o:-~ 1972 1 ·clw rlir..;tric"i; Nac;is·~:r0,te c:.:oulll :~orwm•r_'_ -~~~c j~f3Cord to 2. L:i.[;l :'._roe the L:w ~G I :. .2ve. 2,ttc:.:p·cod. to s::.olr~ -~}18 ·criaJ. Diot:.:ict
~=2.cis·tra;t;c 0 co,,:ld. impouc an irn1_-1~iconrn:n;.·i; ,..;o::.yi;~;:cc o:::cood.ii1,:; 5 ;yo2i~s ( ·c:.1c ;.:inirm..:1'.: ,. () C yearoo in er.·. cot t!--..c Don·[;c;1.c0 o:f 10 yearn irD.pJ.'iGo:;.li:wnt wa,s illegal.~ o:. -:;;__1:., :?ir;~·'.: lL:ilJ o:? t!10 ic,;1.:0 (1) I r:-i,i,J•:..)C, aboYo. J!lav·,::,j,'j_-? .A:;, Ju(Lgo ( as he t:.1.cn was) w:.~ -,:.1 ·i;lie co,~,.. ·l2,L12.:.1·i; !iad : ,one o,~ ,, Safari ·-to D2.r cs Salaa1n, c1.,.'1.d. t>.n two por,:.:0~1,J? wi·~;-. o·c:'.J.•:;I'C ;1a·;• oc, >. .::::,~.::;;(. co1..'.l1:ii contrary to Soc·cion 294(1) o:? t:'..1.8 Pc;,1al Coclo~ Tho two y0ars Accordi:ngl:1 9 · convic:-i;ioi1 uphold 0:,1::;. ·c'.,0 appolJ.;:-.;.1t to contin-1..,0 to scr-:o _,,; 10 YG2I'S on the ,. - 7- to rt:m conc1}.rrcm-t;ly. PRL>CIPP..L R:;;3JD:S..~1' :,~f~-JISTR.:~.T~- (EJ:..,~c11C'..cc.1-. · j\:..r_is(.ic-~io~i.) ~-- A, "H~- l'a.t::'!A PP..r:CIPAL I/3SIDEt11 FAGISTILTE T,':,··'·c,·,-,L7 ,"d . .-,.•·••i· ~;,l· r.J·i· 0•·1) ( J.:J.- U'V.1.L - - u ..... ~. i::h.L. u L, .I. r~OTIOGOT:C ~r n 22~,.d. Fc:·Jn;.s.r:, 9 19c,9_.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.