Juma v. R. Crim. App. 164-A-71; 30/7/71; Kwikima Ag. J.

Juma v. R. Crim. App. 164-A-71; 30/7/71; Kwikima Ag. J.

The appellant was charged with burglary and stealing. When the case came for hearing the Magistrate noted “Accused appears to be a person of unsound mind. He should be given time to get better.” The matter was adjourned and the appellant was remanded in custody. At the adjourned hearing the Magistrate noted in the record: “Accused is interviewed and appears to be of sound mind no”. The appellant then pleaded guilty to both charges and was convicted and sentenced.

            Held: (1) “The learned trial magistrate ought to have followed the procedure laid down the Elieza case (R. v .Elieza Sangwa (1968) H. C. D. 187) as well as in the case of R. v. Matenyamu Nzangula (1968) H. C.D. 420”. (2) “When he appeared at first the appellant denied the charge. After observing him to be mentally unsound and failing to order him to be medically examined, the appellant was remanded in custody. Later he was pronounced fit to defend himself and he pleaded guilty. There is every likelihood that the accused may have done so in madness.” (3) “I would have ordered that this matter go back to the Moshi District Court to be proceeded with in accordance with Section 164 (3) (6) and (8) of the C. P. C. On reflection I find that the appellant, who has been in jail for eleven months now, would be highly prejudiced. Accordingly I order that he be released forthwith.”