Lwando v The People (SCZ Appeal No. 30 of 1993) [1993] ZMSC 139 (3 March 1993)
The sentence of 15 years imprisonment with hard labour was excessive and wrong in principle given the mitigating circumstances; a more lenient sentence was warranted.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1993] ZMSC 139
- Parties
- Appellant: Humphrey Lwando; Respondent: The People
- Court
- Supreme Court of Zambia
- Jurisdiction
- Zambia
- Case Number
- SCZ Appeal No. 30 of 1993
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Manslaughter, Sentencing, Appeal
- 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
Humphrey Lwando
Appellant
The People
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of 15 years imprisonment with hard labour for manslaughter was appropriate given the circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The sentence of 15 years imprisonment with hard labour was excessive and wrong in principle given the mitigating circumstances; a more lenient sentence was warranted.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- sentence of 15 years imprisonment with hard labour set aside
- sentence of 3 years imprisonment with hard labour imposed from date of arrest
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA SCZ Appeal Ho. 30 of 1993 HOLDEN AT NDOLA (Criminal Jurisdiction) HUMPHREY LWANDQ Appellant VS THE PEOPLE Respondent CORAM! Sakala, Chaila and Chirwa JJJ. S. 3rd March, 1993. For the appellant : In person Mr. S. A. G. Twumasl, Assistant Senior State Advocate for the respondent JUDGMENT Chai la, J. S. delivered the judgment of the court. The appellant was charged with manlaughter. The particulars of the offence were that ho, on 10th September, 1991 at Mufulira in the Mufulira District of the Copperbelt Province of the Republic of Zambia unlawfully caused the death of Charles Chishfmba. The facts as read by the State showed that the appellant tried to separate a fight and then he was hit by the deceased Charles Chishtmba. The appellant ran away bleeding from the nose. This took place in a tavern. Shortly afterwards all the people who were Involved in the fight were pushed outside the tavern and among them was the deceased. Out side the tavern the fight continued: the accused went over to the deceased and asked him why he had punched him on the nose, and the fight broke out again. The appellant picked a bomboo stick and hit the deceased with it and the deceased fell down. The appellant was convicted of manslaughter on his own plea and was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment with hard labour. We have taken into account that the appellant was gravely upset and annoyed when he /2....was hit by - J2 - was hit by the deceased when he was trying to separate the fight. We feel the learned trial Judge should have been more lenient if he had taken into account the facts and circumstances of this case. This sentence has come to us with a sense of shock and it is wrong in principle. The appeal Is therefore allowed, the sentence of 15 years imprisonment with hard labour is set aside and In Its place we impose a sentence of 3 years Imprisonment with hard labour with effect from the date of arrest. E. L. Sakala SUPREME COURT JUDGE M. S. Chaila SUPREME COURT JUDGE O. K. Chlrwa SUPREME COURT JUDGE