IBRAHIM LOYA v REPUBLIC 1991 TLR 162 (HC)

 IBRAHIM LOYA v REPUBLIC 1991 TLR 162 (HC)

Court High Court of Tanzania - Tabora

Judge Korosso J

21 October, 1991

Flynote

B Criminal Law - Corruption - By militiaman - Appellant demands and receives

bribe to set complainant free - Appellant convicted of corruption - Complainant

committed an offence known to law - Whether offence committed is corruption or

obtaining money by false pretences Penal Code s. 302, Economic and Organized

Crime Control Act, Paragraph (2) of the C first schedule and ss. 56 (2), 59 (2).

Criminal Practice and Procedure - Charge - Duplicity - Appellant impersonated

policeman - Complainant agreed to bribe appellant because of personation - Appellant

charged with and convicted of personating public officer and attempt at D extortion

- Count of attempts at extortion complex - Penal Code, ss. 100(1), 290(1).

-Headnote

The appellant was charged before the District Court of Tabora with three offences. In

the first count he was charged E with corruption contrary to paragraph 2 of the first

schedule to and sections 56(2), and 59(2) of the Economic and Organized Crime

Control Act No. 13/84. He was convicted of this offence and sentenced to 4 years

imprisonment. In the second count he was charged with the offence of personating a

public officer contrary to section 100(1) of the F Penal Code, convicted and

sentenced to 6 months imprisonment. In the third count he was charged with and

convicted of attempt at extortion contrary to section 290(1) of the Penal Code and

sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.

G The complainant had committed an offence known to law at the time the

appellant put him under restraint and demanded bribe from him.

Held: (i) There is abundant evidence supporting the conviction of obtaining goods by

false pretences c/s 302 of the H Penal Code. This is so because the complainant

committed an offence known to the law at the time when the appellant purported to

accuse him of having committed the offence of assault. The conviction of the offence

of I obtaining goods in the first count is thus substituted for conviction of the

offence of corruption;

1991 TLR p163

KOROSSO J

(ii) it having been proved that the appellant had falsely represented himself as

a policeman and that the A complainant had agreed to give out money because of

the appellant's personation as a policeman, the offence of attempts at extortion c/s 290

of the Penal Code was a duplication of the second count of personating a public

officer c/s 100 (1) of the Penal Code. Conviction of personation up-held, third count

of attempts at extortion quashed and B sentence of 3 years imprisonment imposed

thereon set aside.

Case Information

Appeal dismissed save for third count. C

Bilaro State Attorney, for the Republic.

[zJDz]Judgment

Korosso, J.: The appellant has presented this appeal challenging the decision of the

District Court of Tabora before which he was charged with three offences. In the 1st

count, he was charged with and convicted of the offence of D corruption c/-

paragraph (2) of the First Schedule to and section 56(2) and 59(2) of the Economic and

Organized Crime Control Act No. 13/84. He was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment.

In the 2nd Count, he was charged with and convicted of the offence of personating a

public officer c/s 100 (1) of the E Penal Code. He was sentenced to 6 months

imprisonment.

In the 3rd Count, he was charged with and convicted of attempt at Extortion c/s 290

(1) of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment Dissatisfied with the

findings and sentences of the Lower Court, he has appealed F to this Court.

The facts of the case as admitted by the lower court were that on 20/11/1986 the

Appellant, a militiaman, who was not on duty then happened to meet the

complainant on the way. He accused the complainant of having assaulted a G certain

person at the central market. He ordered the complainant to accompany him to the

Police Station. On the way to the Police Station, the Appellant suggested that if the

complainant paid the sum of Shs. 1,000/=, he would set him free. The complainant

promised to pay the money on the following day. The Appellant, who was in

company H of another militiaman, parted with the complainant after having seized

the complainant's identify card. Meantime, the complainant reported the matter to

Officers of the Squad who arranged the trap on the following day, at the I restaurant

where they had agreed to meet. The Appellant and co-accused were arrested together

with the employee

1991 TLR p164

KOROSSO J

A of the garden restaurant who had been asked to preserve the money for them.

The appellant in his defence testified that he had been innocently assaulted.

B Mr. Bilaro, the learned State Attorney who represented the Republic submitted

that the Appellant should have been convicted of obtaining goods by false pretences

as far as the 1st count was concerned rather than convicting of the Appellant of the

offence of corruption. He supported conviction of the 2nd count and 3rd count.

C I agree with the learned State Attorney that the abundant evidence supported

conviction of obtaining goods by false pretence c/s 302 of the Penal Code. This is so

because the complainant had committed no offence known to the law at the time

when the Appellant purported to accused him of having committed the offence of

assault.

D I am not sure in my mind if the Appellant had committed the offence of attempts

at extortion. It having been proved that the Appellant had falsely represented himself

as a policeman and that the complainant had agreed to give out the money because of

the Appellant's personation as a Policemen, the offence of attempts at extortion c/s E

290 (1) of the Penal Code, was in my humble view, a duplication of the 2nd Count.

On the foregone observations, I would convict the Appellant of the offence of

obtaining goods by false pretences in the 1st Count.

As to the 2nd Count, the conviction of personation is up-held. I quash the 2nd Count

of attempts at extortion c/s (1) F of the Penal Code, and set aside the sentence of 3

years imprisonment.

Appeal dismissed save for the 3rd Count.

1991 TLR p165

A