Chiyambeni and Anor v People (SCZ Appeal 132 of 1995) [1996] ZMSC 54 (6 August 1996)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA SCZ Appeal No. 132 of 1995 HOLDEN AT KABWE (Criminal Jurisdiction) PETER CHIYAMBENI STAPHOD MPHADA VS THE PEOPLE Appellants . Respondent CORAM: Chaila, Chirwa and Nuzyamba JJ. S. For the Appellant : In person For the Respondent : Mr. James Mwanakatwe, Principal State Advocate 6th August, 1996. JUDGMENT Chaila, J. S. delivered the judgment of the court. The appellants were convicted of aggravated robbery and on being found guilty of the offence, they were sentenced to 15 years imprisonment with hard labour. The learned Principal State Advocate at the beginning of the appeal informed the court that he was having some difficulty in supporting the conviction on the charge of aggravated robbery because the learned trial judge relied on the evidence of the arresting officer whose evidence was that he found the appellants wearing hats belonging to the complainant. There was no identification of the appellants to connect them to the robbery charge and he told us that the evidence does not support the charge of aggravated robbery. He, however, informed the court that the appropriate offence should have been receiving stolen property and that the appellants should have been convicted of receiving. The court put this suggestion to the appellants and tne appellants gladly accepted that they should have been convicted of receiving stolen property. We agree with the course taken by the learned Principal State Advocate. The evidence did not prove that the offence of aggravated 17... J2 robbery had been committed by the two appellants* They were found in possession of some stolen property belonging to the complainant and we entirely agree that the proper vedict should have been receiving of the properties found on the appellant. We allow the appeal against conviction of aggravated robbery. The conviction is quashed and the sentence of 15 years imprisonment with hard labour is set aside in its place we substitute an offence of receiving. Since the appellants have gladly accepted the offence of receiving the court will not impose a normal maximum sentence we normally do for these offences; but in order to discourage people from receiving stolen properties this court will take a stern view despite their accepting the offences. We impose therefore a sentence of 6 years imprisonment with hard labour to take effect from the date of their arrests. M. S. Chaila SUPREME COURT JUDGE D. K. Chirwa SUPREME COURT JUDGE W/M. Muzya^ba SUPREME COURT JUDGE