AHMADI ALLY MAUNDU v REPUBLIC 1994 TLR 200 (CA)

 

AHMADI ALLY MAUNDU v REPUBLIC 1994 TLR 200 (CA)

Court Court of Appeal of Tanzania - Dar es Salaam

Judge Kisanga AgCJ, Omar JJA and Lubuva JJA

B CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 129 OF 1994

7 October, 1994

(From the conviction of the High Court of Tanzania at Mtwara, Mkwawa, J)

Flynote

C Criminal Law - Provocation - Whether a demand for `talaka' rather than

reconciliation amounts to provocation.

-Headnote

D This was an appeal from a conviction for murder by the High Court. The

appellant sought to rely on provocation as defence because his wife preferred ending

their matrimonial differences by demanding `talaka' rather than proposed

reconciliation.

Held:

(i) The demand for `talaka' by the deceased did not constitute any

unlawful conduct which would form a basis for legal provocation. E

Case Information

Appeal dismissed.

No case referred.

[zJDz]Judgment

F Kisanga, Ag CJ, delivered the following considered judgment of the Court:

This appeal is completely devoid of merit; it ought to have been rejected summarily.

It arises out of a conviction for murder and the sentence of death passed on the

appellant by the High Court (Mkwawa, J) sitting at Mtwara. G

It was alleged, and admitted by the appellant, that the appellant killed his wife by

stabbing her with a knife. In his defence at the trial the appellant sought to rely on

provocation as a defence, but the court rejected it. The appellant stated that on the H

material day he and his wife had set out to go to his grandfather who lived in a

different village in order to refer their family or matrimonial misunderstandings to

him for reconciliation. Apparently at the time of setting out, the wife did not know

the purpose of the mission, and so on the way she asked the appellant what the

intended visit was for. Upon the appellant disclosing the purpose of the visit, she

preferred ending their matrimonial differences by demanding `talaka' ie I

1994 TLR p201

divorce from the appellant rather than by the proposed reconciliation. The appellant

A claimed that such reaction by his wife angered him so much that he stabbed her

four times using a knife, killing her instantly.

Like the trial court, we have no difficulty at all in rejecting the appellant's plea of

provocation. The demand of `talaka' by the deceased did not constitute any B

unlawful conduct on her part which would form the basis for legal provocation. The

appellant's conviction, therefore, was amply justified. His appeal is hopelessly devoid

of merit and, as stated at the very beginning, it was fit case for summary rejection.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed in its entirety. C

1994 TLR p201

E