Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

R.v. Athumani s/o Selemani, Crim. Rev. 64-D-67; -/-/67; Saidi, J.



R.v. Athumani s/o Selemani, Crim. Rev. 64-D-67; -/-/67; Saidi, J.

Accused were convicted of assaulting a police officer, resisting lawful arrest and obstructing a police officer. The first accused was fined Shs. 800/- or 12 months imprisonment in default on one count, and Shs. 100/- or 3 months on the second and third counts. The second and third accused were each sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment on counts 1 and 2, the sentences to run concurrently. At the time of the High Court judgment, the latter accused had served their sentences. Nothing on the record indicated that the first accused was able to pay the fine imposed.

            Held; (1) The fines imposed on the first accused were set aside as excessive, there being “nothing on the record indicating that the accused was able to pay so large a fine.” Fines “should bear reasonable relation to the accused ’s  power to pay…..” Citing Mohamed Juma v. Rex, 1T.L.R.257; Nyakulina d/o Chacha v. Rex, 1 T.L.R. 341. (2) Under section 29 of the Penal Code, the maximum term of imprisonment in default of payment of any fine is six months. (3) As the accused were all first offenders, the magistrate “should have imposed exactly the same sentence on all of them.’

The sentence of the first accused was reduced to result in immediate release.

Post a Comment

0 Comments