19820412 TZHC Tanga

IN THE HIGH COURT OP TANZANIA

AT TANGA .APpEITE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL 'APPEAL NO. 33 OP 1980 O11l. Criminal Case No. 38 of 197oVthe District Court of Tanga District at Taga 14 ., Bef ores J. MtJSHUMBUSI.. Esq, D/Migistrate SALIMrJ ALl KIB1RAZA • .,..,........APpEILANT (Orig; accused) :versus . . THE REPUBLIQ...,....,........,.,.RES?OJflDENT (Orig Prosecutor) CHARGE: 1st Count: .Cbnsipiracy to coit a felonY l c7s 384 of the Penal Code s Cap 16 of the Laws . 2i.d 4th'6th,'8th. lOth L Counts: Praudulent false accounting ô/s 317 (b) of the Penal 'Code Gap. 16 of the Laws.3 :3rd, .. 7tht9th. 11th Counts:,Steaiing by - rvnt is 271 and 265of tePeñaJ. COde Cap. 6 of the Iws

JUD GMENT Sj.sya, J: This apè1].ànt, Salim AliKibaraza, and two o1es who re_ acquitted at the trial were oint1y charged on i total number of nine Counts of offerices under the Penal C6de. óxie aid/or the. first count was that of Conspircy to commit a felony ccntrary to section 394• The rest, namely Co -ants 3 9 '5 79,'11, 13, 15 an .17'wer& of Stealing by Servant Like his two co...accused, the appellant was acquitted on the first and/bI' Conspiacy Count but'hewas noeo 1ucIr O the other counts. He was convicted as charged arid he was setencd to the statutory minimum of three years imprisonment on each count - 2 'p L Sentences to ran ooneurr atly. DissatiSfied he is now appealing to this Court Evidence was adduced tt -the trial to show that the appellant was a headman employed by Gcpc. His duties at the material time included going to the Railway stat on and find out how 'many baga of Uganda RobutaCoffe were to be off loaded from the wagons on a particular day and the number of iours1 requiied'to handle the load He would then supply .1he.e partilars toife clerks coneerned at the Gapex offices whereupon a paymat voucher showing the number of bags as mentioned by the appellant and the names of the labourers as Supplied by him would be shown, he payee as per the said payment voucher would, hoWever, be the pellant After the payment voucher has duly been signed by the :ithor1sed

siiator1 - t.lien the lump sum is eeritjiaL1y paiSd:tohe; t ipellazi Bv.dence was given 'DY PTI i that on 12/6/79 0 acting upon information rcitd he pocedea t Gap off and seized among other documents, eight payment vouchers xhibtP.4 (a) to (h) inc1usive The amounts ónthëse were acow1edg to , hae received by the appellaflt Howe-er, upon checking - the aiiways goods delivery book covering the same period of the pant..it wa, discovered that the number of bags Shown by the appellant to Lave been handled Was greatèr.. The bags in excess had not been harf iedand yet paymentfor.thm had already been mctde The amount pal for the bags of, coffee which never existed Is as per Counts 3 1 5, 71 3, 11 13, 15 and 17 in the charge as laid: In his defence -the apellant denied receiving the money in exces8 This denial was rejec -bed by the learned trial iftg4 kstrate and y I must add, quite ±ightly so: In his petition of appeal the appellant only makes protestations of his .nnocence He toes not raise any point of law or any new line of defenoe / 3 In So fai as he was the one who supplied the number of the bags and the names of the labourers and also in so far as he was the person to whOm all the money was paid it Was incumbent upon him to account for he mpnies which were paid for the bags which were never handled nor ±nded, there at a11 TIILS he miserably, failed to do. The only reasonb1e

inZerence to ce drawn is indeed, that he stole the said Sums of money, In the ent the convictions are sound in law and the same are hereby upheld Turning to sentence there is flothing that this Court can do by way of reducing the same as the substantive sentence to be served b the appellant ±5 the bare minimum under the law Rb In the final evet this appel fails and it is heresy dismissed in its entirety , (H I.E.D'. &sr) ;S Judge ., 12/4/82 J , I -.