19900620 TZCA Mwanza3

( COlWJh NY ALA LI 2 C ..• J •.,·_ 1-,~AT;AJ"\i:89· J ,A. And. :iiA.IiAD~lfl.rJL J .Ae) Ul.;., _ , WAIJDWI s/o tiZEriBE AN;D TIIE 11.EPUBL IC onilt'o.Ool'>l)CIOOoCOCOOoOOtt0¢00ooc-enococ-ooooC (Appeal from t:1e conviction o:i: ·c:.ic ~Iich C:~urt o::? T.:mzania at Musoma) (I!I11alv.::ianyap J.) dA.·:;ocl -c:1e 21st day of .SepteEJ7ior, 1989 in Criminal Sessions C;;,se No., 77 of 1987 NYALALI 2 C.J. ~ T'ae a;;pellant 112.ndui s/o M?.El'-IBE was cJ.1ai•c.;ed und co:wided. in -t'.ie ~Iic:1 Court on circuit at Mt,noma for the o:~fencc o-? munler o/s 196 o? t:.1e Penal Code le:,;:ned advcicnte, appe,.~red :for t:1e app_ellant, wb:i.:.rco.s Mro Hussa, Sc ,ior State memorandum of appeal con·c2ining two crouncls of r.:_1pc;i.l, t.-iouc;J.1 he o..r_zv.ed only From tl1e procccclin,c,s both in t~1is court ancl i;l1e cou_rt _belm·T ·:;:ic following matters o:Z- :fact .are not irt dispute bct"een t"'.1e pD.rtics o D-t..~:.:in 0 tlle night of St·.nday 23i•d I1krc:.1, 1986, there wr:s a diicico d.n.,."lcc at t:.?.o '.·.or:.e of one James s/0 Mabera (PI-T .2) in Mmazame Vi llage 9 huso1:1a Ih ·.trict., r-t is conraon grotmd that the appcllcmt, and one Jurua s/o l~orle alias Nar;essa, o.u well as his \ brotl1er James s/o Mee,esoa (PF .3) were amonc ··:~10sc H:10 a:~1;,mdcd t~o c.~isoo d.nncc., It is common ground aluo t,1:-i.t soi::eJcimc 12.ter ij_1 ·t_rn course of t:.e '..ifJCO

d.c'J1ce, there ~urred a sct1.·~::-1e involvin(; the appcllc:::,·c n,nd. t~1e sc1.icl Jrn:ia s/o Kocle and that at tlle 1i1).te:rial ·i;:i.Ele tl1e 8.ppcll<>.nt ap;)c,:.red to be clrunk 0 It is 2 the s - : . ~ s/o Kode wns stabbed to de::itll Hit1.::. a l-..ni:2e by Tlnt is the end of m2·0ters w1disr-utedo From the s,qJ,1e procoecL.nn;s in t:1is co-.,rt a,1cl --;-;:.io cou.rt bdm,, ·i;~1e folloi:ing matters seem -co be in dispute between -:;11e p;u-tics& r·:; ic ·t:10 . l.tad prosecution c;:ise tl.i;:,,·i; a:c-~er tl1e first scu..1:'fie/enc1.. ed, the decea~od loft PW.2's prer.:ises, running towards holiJe3 The appolJ.,-..nt gave c:b.a,se :1ncl 1-uen t:ie dece.:1sed tripDed ancl :'.:ell° d.01m 1 he caueht up \·1it.~.1 a.nd sta.l)becl :1ir.1 to doat:.i. ~ , o t : J e r hand tl1e clc:fcnce case is to t:ie e:Zfcct tbat after -t.1c enc'L of the :;:'i1°s-t scuf:ne, the appellant, u:10 was very cfrunk, left :for ~1is ~1or,;e but was w2.ylaid or ambl'.G.'Led by a. group o:Z four peor>le, includin 0 t:1e clcc02.sed, wb.o beat ;_1ira up and fellei hin dowi;. It is part of ·C::ic c:c:::cnce c2. se -;;:~G.-i; t].ie a_,.1) : )Gll - . Q.n'··u s-'t,-= <., -... 1•. ,fY',,'!',led u,~ ' ..,,o:.a1·11ct lli"s attack,Grs •. , ancl in ·i;·1c 80:TSO of ·c~:c ctruL(Y,.ole. '--' , he pulled out his L11i:2e and stabbed tl1c deceo.spL Tlle first iss1.1.c :~01° co11siclcration and. C::.:.cioion in in so

far as .the matters _in con-i;rovers;y- are conc~rned, :i'.s w:.:ct:~Gr t~1e c:.ppcll ~nt stabbed tl1e decezi.sed ei bcr in .self-oo:fence or by reason o:,: intoxici:'.tiono Obviously, the question of sGl:£'-<lo/;_ace arises only if t:;.c vcTsion of ·i;!1E. 2.;1~-::.J.J.: nt concerning the events 1i.,ic:1 le'a. llio to stab ·ci.10 clece ..:secl is accep·;;ccl. Tl1c le: r11ed trial jud~·e ;:,,ncl ·i;~1<2 assessors 1{,o aided. :1ir.i in trying <1.nc.l c~ociding ·i;l1c 0 c;:,se, unanimously re::jec·0ed tl1e versfo:n of -t~rn o.ppcll.::.nto In a p2..ct o:C :1is 11 The ve;rsion e;ivcn by t~1€. accused rai::::i:n(, ·:i:i.c defence of sdf- defcmce, Lmst ~-10 a co6L:od up itory in orclc:c to esc'l.pe jur::ticec I was irr;presscd by the prosecution witnesses i11d ,·1;:,,s s--:tis:~iccl that t)ey WGTEJ .speaking -~he truth on ·ftis point. 11 We can find 110 1,JEl,SlS . to f.:ml t t ,is. concl1.1.ciono As the L'2cJ.y asecssor stated in lrnr advice ·co ·t:.1e learned tTial jud(:c 5 i·c is ~1i:,..1ly l.llll i~ :: J_y tl1:.1t, the appell,mt, who :t)_)i~c.::.rcd drunky Nould :iave been in a posi~;i0n -~o overwhelm • f 01..!r aggressors w~o ar:ilJv.s:2.ed him., n 3 the As to/defence of infoxic2.fion, t:.10 q-,.ll.:r:.~·cioi.1· :,:_tnt D.l"iGGS is 1T~1c~;:1cr t'.1 8 appGllant wt1s so into::ricn.ted, o.s fo be incapv,blo of formi~1e t:~c specific intention to kill or CD.USG grievous l)oclilJ

~l:1.-I'D to 1;:1c cl.eceascclo ~- . . assessors, concluded -~~1at t:.10 appellro.1t 1 s dot;rce o:.f' intoxicatim1 1-12s not sucl1 as to render ~1i;·,1 incapable of forLing t·.1e specific in-',en-co In ·i;'.::.e ('- 11 As rega,rds ·r10 clc:' once of into:rni~tion, I GCfLl2Jly join hencls wi t,h -:;:1c t~1roG assessors, tllat -~.:is defence is no'~ open to wo C!.Ccusodo I concede that -;;_·1G a.ccuscd had tC.:..:o~l S{)jne liquor, hLl-c ~.1e wns _no-t so drunk so as to 110 inco.pablc of :f:'_orrninc -;;::.is specific intent ·of l;:ilJ.inr:: or c,1usin8' grievous ll·,rm4 11 evidence concernine; -;;~10 conduct of the appcllc11t 2.t -chc tir.10 ,,:.,·cci"ial to the c .-se is incornp::itiblG with t:1e appellantt s coi.1·kntion t:'...:.2.t :1c :.J.~!cl t,:tlcen two litres of ·bo powe1°fl.il illici,t drinl;: 3 J,.;.1oun v,:,riously ns 1 Mosl1i 1 or 1_Gongo' before he woat to t:10 disco da.ncoa I-/:i is ap).'.:',rc.rt :::'ron ·c:..to tho appEllant could :1:wc taken so much of t:w pmicD:ul liquor 5 w'i-'.; rnut being completely imnobili:&eclo We concur vi•c~1 tLo :cinJ.in{1's of t.',c lcar:1ed jucl_:-~·e that the appcllr,nt uas not so drunk ~s to be incnpable of :::'orr:~i:1::-;- the intontion to kill or cnuse ,'.3'riev6us ~1arn ·fo t~ic decc2,,scclb Ho -~.!.ink spo9ific in-cent, U uoulcl :1avo been difficulti i_:~ not ir.1possiblc:, :'.'?:..' t:.1e owner of t:1e promises to put- an end to t::.e fir:::t ocl:.f'fle. Having come to t.' .is conclusion, '211d _s:~nce ·c'.1ore is no ot:~cr d.o::-'c;1ce We thus dismiss the 2.~1lxal in its rntirety ~ ooo/4 4 DNT':SO at MWAIT-~A t.\is 20th day of Juno, 1990. [:'b L. rJyalali CHI:i:I" JUSTICE L. rn. Makar::e JUS:JJCE OP·APPELL A. S. L. Ramad.-1c.ni JUL'::'J. CE O.. AFF-:J/:,.L ) (s. s. Kaijago) -- D:a,PUTY rillGI srnltAR