Abdallah & Others v. R. Crim. App. 254; 256-259-A-71; 30/7/71Kwikima Ag. J.

Abdallah & Others v. R. Crim. App. 254; 256-259-A-71; 30/7/71Kwikima Ag. J.

The appellants were convicted on their own pleas of guilty of transporting Agricultural Products without a permit from the National Agricultural Products Board c/s 3 and 8 of the National Agricultural Board (Transport Control Act) 1964. Orders were made forfeiting all the produce. It was against these orders that the appellants appealed.

Held: (1) “[T]he learned Magistrate who ordered the forfeiture did not specify the authority for doing so. This was clearly wrong following he case of Ngulia Mwakanyemba v. R. (1968) H. C. D. 314 wherein it was directed that “Every forfeiture order should specify the authority under which it is made.”  (2) “In the same case it was urged that the forfeiture order “should contain sufficient reasons to show that the Magistrate applied his mind judicially to the question whether or not the order should be made.” The learned magistrate mud be taken to task for failing to record any reason for making the forfeiture.” (3) “With the forfeiture the cumulative effect (of the fines of Shs. 250/=) is so devastating as to leave one almost speechless.” (4) Forfeiture orders were set aside.