REPUBLIC v KALISTO MAKUMBULI 1989 TLR 100 (HC)

 

REPUBLIC v KALISTO MAKUMBULI 1989 TLR 100 (HC)

Court High Court of Tanzania- Mtwara

Judge Maina J

14 June, 1989 H

Flynote

Criminal Practice and Procedure - Sentencing - Power to impose sentence less than

the minimum prescribed - Valid reasons for imposing a lesser sentence -

Disqualification I from holding or obtaining a driving licence.

1989 TLR p101

MAINA J

-Headnote

In revisional proceedings before the High Court the trial judge found that the

subordinate A court had imposed a lesser sentence than the minimum prescribed by

law. The judge called upon the accused to show cause why the sentence should not be

enhanced and why he should not be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving

licence. B

The judge enhanced the sentence but allowed a lesser sentence than the minimum

prescribed and disqualified the accused from holding or obtaining a driving licence.

Held: (i) There were special reasons for the court to impose a sentence less than the C

minimum fine. The minimum sentence prescribed in section 63(1)(b) of the Road

Traffic Act for an offence of causing injuries through reckless driving contrary to

section 42 is a fine of ten thousand shillings. The sentence of fine of five hundred

shillings was manifestly D lenient and should be enhanced to five thousand shillings.

A person who wishes not to be disqualified from driving must advance reasons which

are special to the offence. The reasons given by the accused were special to the

offender and not the offence. Therefore, the accused is disqualified from holding or

obtaining a driving licence for a period of three years and his learner's driving licence

cancelled. E

Case Information

Order accordingly.

Hyera - for the Republic. F

[zJDz]Judgment

Maina, J.: The accused/respondent, was convicted on his own plea of guilty of four

counts under the Road Traffic Act 1973. The fourth count was on causing injury

through reckless driving for which he was sentenced to a fine of shs.500/= or two

months G imprisonment in default.

The record of the case was called for inspection because it appeared that the sentence

for the offence in the fourth count was illegal. Furthermore, there was no order

disqualifying the accusedfrom driving or obtaining a driving licence. The accused has

H been called upon to show cause why the sentence should not be enhanced and also

why he should not be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence.

The facts which the accused admitted showed that he drove a motorcycle without

displaying learner plates and that he drove so recklessly that he knocked own a I

pedestrian who sustained injuries.

1989 TLR p102

MAINA J

When called upon by this court to say why the sentence should not be enhanced, the

A accused said that he is a first offender, he had several dependants and that he also

sustained serious injuries in his attempt to avoid the collision. The pedestrian

sustained minor injury which was a sprain on the leg and on the shoulder. B

In the circumstance, these were special reasons which are relevant for the purpose of

imposing a sentence less than the minimum prescribed. The minimum sentence

prescribed in section 63(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act for an offence of causing injuries

through reckless driving contrary to section 42 is a fine of ten thousand shillings. In

the C circumstances of this case, I have held that the reasons advanced amount to

special reasons and the court finds it fit to impose a sentence less than the minimum

fine. However, the sentence of fine shs. five hundred imposed by the District Court

was D manifestly lenient. The sentence is enhanced to fine shs. 5,000/= or one year

imprisonment in default. Since the accused has paid the fine of shs.500/= imposed by

the District Court, he should pay shs. 4,500/=.

As regards disqualification from driving, the accused said that he depends on driving

to E be able to perform his duties as an auditor. With respect these are reasons

special to the offender and not to the offence. A person who wishes not to be

disqualified from driving must advance reasons which are special to the offence. In

other words, the court can make an order not to disqualify an offender from driving

where the reasons advanced are special to the offence. The accused has not given such

reasons. F

It is hereby ordered that the accused be,and is hereby, disqualified from holding or

obtaining a driving licence for a period of three (3) years effective from 18 January

1989 the date he was convicted. His learner's driving licence is hereby canceled. G

Order accordingly.

1989 TLR p103

A