Robertson Zulu and Anor v People (Appeal No. 114- 116 of 198) [1988] ZMSC 90 (9 August 1988)
The evidence did not support convictions for aggravated robbery but did support convictions for receiving stolen property; therefore, the aggravated robbery convictions were quashed and substituted with convictions for receiving stolen property under section 118 of the Penal Code.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1988] ZMSC 90
- Parties
- Appellant: Robertson Zulu; Appellant: Jackson Ngoma; Respondent: The People
- Court
- Supreme Court of Zambia
- Jurisdiction
- Zambia
- Case Number
- Appeal No. 114- 116 of 198
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal allowed in part; convictions for aggravated robbery quashed; convictions for receiving stolen property substituted; sentences imposed
- Legal Topics
- Aggravated Robbery, Receiving Stolen Property, Evidence, Sentencing
- 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
Robertson Zulu
Appellant
Jackson Ngoma
Appellant
The People
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the convictions for aggravated robbery were supported by cogent evidence
- 2 Whether convictions should be substituted for a lesser offence
Ratio Decidendi
The evidence did not support convictions for aggravated robbery but did support convictions for receiving stolen property; therefore, the aggravated robbery convictions were quashed and substituted with convictions for receiving stolen property under section 118 of the Penal Code.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed in part; convictions for aggravated robbery quashed; convictions for receiving stolen property substituted; sentences imposed
Orders
- Convictions for aggravated robbery quashed
- Convictions for receiving stolen property substituted under section 118 of the Penal Code
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF· ZAMBIA ,, .. . BOLDEN AT LUSAKA ·. i:: (Criminal, Jurisdittion), . I, ; . ; ; I, :. , .· _ · 't·...:.'''.:,,-,.;,s, 1,:• .. -, ;~;~,or;·~\',.~!,)"~... Apeeal No. 114 - 116 of 1986 · . · · ; , . ~,1/ ,,,1 '}~£ "',;·, : .. :.,·. ;' :: nc.~,~~~·w,_1c~i:_.':,'·~.:~;.if ".~d~:,~irj , ' ': :; , :/ -4•.·:.-:_. "' ,;r ... '.''.,, f:'L·.,.,')' f'.•-1,,i·"---~1~-n~~i+',)/;.v. ~ -:,/:_~/:.·;:, ... . . ' ;. : q ·-; ROBEirso~'J'zuttt·; '' ; :· '' :: ,:,,it'l f;;'iif'&Ft'.•.' ,:ca:tr~r;.;: .. , !:, '. )V ' ;,11' 1.-iM,·, r:\le'~PflIJ,n1;s'· F~CKSO~ jlfGQMA ,. it ,;!'f·:,--1. H..:..1.. ·., , · . •. ·.'~;'. - .. . . . TI/E PEOPLE · • > .: ·"' / , ,,1 : l'il, ,,. ,,Respo~~l!n; " .. ;., ·--~ ..,,, -i:: ' f "", CJRAM: Ngulube, Ag. C,J., Gardner, Ag. O. C. J., arid ChaU11, Ag. J. S., (',~-~1{·,•,-1,_~··~c-·1, ,/;i,!l-f/li. yl J~ ,r "-' ,:, , , ' fJ,1}i'. }1,:,rQ ;, ,'- ••, • • "J, Appellants in person N- Sivakumaran, Senior Asst. . ','./~, ._.,·,.:-,'. ,,..i, t•,,,1 ,. St1Stel\dvoc~te~ !~,, ~f~l~o,ndent . . ' '.· , .. ----1,:~:·,:_: .;_ ... ~: .. .,.,-,;.~ ....... ;,.'J1'.:!~.·.,·_, •. ;l,',,..·,,.<1"-~/.1,•~<;':Jl.,\'!:,..,t,.,., "</: ., " " ,, ,. "'"' ,. :,,., ,,, T . , • .··9th. August,·19ss , 'i:i"·;,·,t .-~~, ,!-- ' . .., ,-: ~ ' ·.- . .'. •·{('·' .. '•, Gardner, J.s., delivered the\judgment of t!i'i ~curt. ' ... -. . ' ,· '-,,.. . .. . · A}:{,_· . . ·.· . _. :· -'. . _· · The appel !'ants Were convicted· of· tw6';1iountfi~f':i~gra~'[tei('' ,.,. •. .·:, ;,_,' : .. ,Ji"..· . ··.'_·,:_·,:_··:\_;:·:\-·'·i·\'.iJ.:'- ·< ' - , . , .. . . · . ,J':' ~- ' .. ,~' .,. ;,, / ' . ·-\--~· •_;,,'f'.~,;~;(•,;., . ' .~. ' f• '\' 4 '~·"'1:~-; . .:· :_ robbery•;1 the particulars of t.he,first charo,r,,MI~i~~~t,/'th~rtotb::;, ,.:;'. .,.~~' •"'' -~- -~-.,,. ........ ,r,.,...,,.,.,_ •.. , ' ~:-'.--e-i\~~:, . . ,,... the 30th of Augu/st , 1985, in Lusaka, stQle a qu11nt1tf.of personal :'. H, ,· •., I • ' . / ,, "'-:' C l . • •, ' • ,- : : property belonging to Pats1:m Sfamu1,u1.u ~!I~. irtille:i/\t~lile of ,su~h · .. .;·; . ' ', steal Ing used or t!lreatimed to us/ii .v~olence •.. T~e :Pa~J1=u1ars ·of • " ·.• ·, _\," _,,··\i\~;,:;"~· ·:.. :'·: :_;-:-~. '~1_,!' ' . .,- -,:,.' ' ' . ' ' . ' ' . '',• .,, . . . . . the second charge were th~t on th.e 31st' day of Augus,t: }985; 'fn '.t.;us'ak'a · , . ( ' · · • • ·. ., they stole further perso11al property ·from C~r;,1~~!.~\li~~Ma ,~IT~/il~#F~e: >, .t .. •.i:,11,i:1,tt 1\-t•,;-t~.'<---.~:;:\ ""~ ·-:·,,:,,:~' --~---~~ -:-~••'" ' time of .such steal1rig they used vJoJence~ t'.: :,:·: '. .. '·:;.:. > ;. .,_·-~~;::~:-_·-\~~:~\,:f,:.t: .·-._-:;:_·-.- . ' Mr. S1vakumaran on behalf of the:Stateh~cist~ken the ver1proper· ,_.f.,\,:_.?!,\·•tgir,.:'.},i:1 . , ' . ·,_·- . ·. ,. _ . ' · . ' . ' ., ,. ···.. . . .·,' course of saying that 1.n,,vtew of the ab•ence of CQgent, .evidence . ," I , ' : ·,: ··: I " • J '~ • • • • against the appellants he i;toes not '.~~pport the ~onvlct1pns for • ~ggravated robbery. We agree that .. ihe evidence in ttii~ :case did not support such convictlons. However there was ample evide.nce that the ' ·, ' .,,. . . . ' _11,..u "''' ,., 'i!o',i,i"iii6~y.. I ~ / ,• • ", :· :,, ,,, :CL"•'C .. !J_.,·-~.-. ~~--.~tS_t_'l!\1,1,t.·. • • The appeals against the two convict1-0n~ for aggravated ' , . robbery are allowed. 'Ttie' C!)OVictioits for those offences are qua~hed'• ,!}? . . tb substitute agatnst each ~pellant. ; and the sentences are -~~side. on both charges, convtc;~ons for f'.~C!f1Ying stolen property contrary:· j t':'"~:-:>d Li-~ti·b'' .;·, to section 118 of the Penal J\~de;)'·Jn respect of botll'charges we· sentence both the appellants to five y~ars imprlso~ment with hard ~ ...... , labour concurrently, with.'eff~ii;(\i'rom the 2nd of September; "1986';.nf ·.,r~i:;.,J-<•·_; .s~·; ;.~/-':~~' . ·: .. ·i. · ·"~- ,., · . . ' . ,, ·: -, ' ' ·'i ' , t. ' ' . . " "•,•·,', ' ; · ' j , '