Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TZCA

19710917 TZCA Dar es Salaam

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The convictions for stealing by servant and possession of bhang were upheld as the appellant was found in possession of the items and his explanations were not credible. The conviction for escaping from lawful custody was quashed as the appellant had not yet been arrested at the time of the alleged escape.

Court disposition

appeal partly allowed

Orders

  • Convictions on counts 1 (stealing by servant) and 3 (possession of bhang) upheld
  • Conviction on count 2 (escaping from lawful custody) quashed and sentence set aside
  • Fine on count 3 substituted with 4 months imprisonment to run concurrently with sentence on count 1

02

Material facts

Parties

Salum M. Iax

Appellant

The Republic

Respondent

Amounts and remedies

  • Value of Stolen Goods: TZS 19,431
  • Fine Imposed (original): TZS 400
  • Sentence on Count 1: months 12
  • Sentence on Count 3 (substituted): months 4
  • Sentence on Count 2 (quashed): months 6

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Appeal / Judgment

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Appellant claimed the shop goods were given by his employer as security against wages and that the bhang was used as medicine.
Respondent
Respondent denied the appellant's claims; evidence showed appellant was found in possession of stolen goods and bhang.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Court precedent as referenced in judgment

    A fine must be one that an accused person can pay according to his financial standing; otherwise, imprisonment for default is inappropriate.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The convictions for stealing by servant and possession of bhang were upheld as the appellant was found in possession of the items and his explanations were not credible. The conviction for escaping from lawful custody was quashed as the appellant had not yet been arrested at the time of the alleged escape.

Obiter and limits

  • A fine of 400/- for a house servant is too high as he cannot obviously pay it.

Court disposition

appeal partly allowed

  • Convictions on counts 1 (stealing by servant) and 3 (possession of bhang) upheld
  • Conviction on count 2 (escaping from lawful custody) quashed and sentence set aside
  • Fine on count 3 substituted with 4 months imprisonment to run concurrently with sentence on count 1

Source and reliance status

TZCA · 17 September 1971

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.

Source document

TZCA

Judgment· 17 September 1971

19710917 TZCA Dar es Salaam

AT IAR HS ALAAM , — CRIMINAL APPEAL NO, 335 OF 1971 Original Criminal Case NO. 53 O 1971 Of the District Court of Lthdi Dtstriot at Lindi Before 0, U. Mtenga, Esq., Resident Magitrate SALUM MI.AX • ., ................. . . . . . •. . . . . . • . . . APP&LLANT versus TIM REPUBLIC a. a • a a a , a a a a • e • . a a a a • • 4 • • , a a a * a a a RbPONDiiNP CHARGE: jet counti Stealing by Servant c/s 271 & 265 of the - Penal Code.. 2n& Qount: Aecaping from lawful custody c/s 116 of the Penal Code, unt Being in possessionof bhang c/s 2(b) of Cap. 134,

JUDGMENT AIDI, 0.3. It is clear from the evidence on the record that there is no merit in the appeal against the conviction on the 1st and 3rd cøunte of stealing by servant and being in poseesion'of bhng as the appellant was found in possession of the eo1en goods and the bhang. I see no merit in his defeiioe that he was given these shop goods valued at 19431/- by the oómP1ainn ) his employer, as security against his wages. By itself the att transaction is unuMual and was further- more denied by the complainant. It is also evidently clear that the appellant's complaint against the conviction on the 3rd count of being in possession of a quantity of bhang is unfounded. He claimed that he was using the bhang as medicine. This explanation cannot be accepted. Accordingly I dismiss the appeal against the conviction on these two counts. On 'the questioh of sentence I think it was unnecessary to impose a fine which could not be paid and result in the appellant staying in jail longer than necessary. A fine of 400/- for a house servant is too high as he cannot obviously pay it. A fine an we have repeatedly said in this Court must boe one that an accused person can, according to his financial standing, pay, otherwise he has to go to jail for default of payment. On count 3 I substitute a prison term of 4 months to be served concurrently with the sentence of 12 months passed on count I. I

now turn to count 2 which charged the appellant with escaping from lawful' custody. The substance of the charge was that the appellant ran away from his house when confronted by police officers who went to search his house. As the appellant had not yet been arrested then the offence of escaping from lawful custody was not committed, I quash the conviction on count 2 and set aside the sentence of 6 months 'imprisonient passed on it. Save as indicated the appellant's appeal stands dismied. Delivered in Court at Par es Salaam this 17th day of September, 1971. (Sgd..) (A SAIDI)

CHIEF JUSTICE

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Penal Code sections 271, 265, 116

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Cap. 134 section 2(b)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.