Amin v. R. Crim. App. 428-M-70; 29/970; Mnzavas, Ag. J.

Amin  v. R.  Crim.  App.  428-M-70;   29/970; Mnzavas,   Ag.   J.

Appellant was charged with and convicted of one count of stealing   c/s 265 of the Penal Code and eleven counts of obtaining money by false pretences c/s 302 of the Penal Code, and was sentenced to 2 years and twenty four strokes corporal punishment in respect of the first count and 12 months imprisonment in respect of each of the other counts. It was established that one Mansuri Rashid (P.W.1) who was then the Regional Executive Officer of TANU in the West Lake Region, took appellant to his office and while the two were in the office, P. W. I. left appellant twice in the office in which there was an open cupboard containing TANU receipt books and other documents.  Several witnesses testified that appellant issued them with TANU receipts which were missing, claiming that he was a TANU Secretary. In addition, on being searched, appellant was found with one receipt which was also missing. He did not give any explanation how he came to be in possession of this receipt.  On count eleven, it was alleged that appellant obtained 6/= by false pretences from one Raphael Kaboge who was in Uganda at the time of trial and did not give evidence. Conviction on this count was based on hearsay evidence.

Held:  (1) “Taking the evidence of P. W. I into account and the fact that the accused was found in possession of one of the  receipts from the missing book and the facts which show that many other receipts from the missing book were issued to people by the  accused who was identified by P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.5, P.W.6 and P.W.10 at different police identification parades I can only say that the accused is the person who stole the TANU receipt book. The appeal against conviction insofar as count one is concerned is without any merit.”  (2)  “As for counts 2 to 10 and 12, we have the    testimony of P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.5, P.W.6, P.W.9and P.W.10 to whom the accused issued Tanu receipts and collected money, and saying to them as he was issuing the receipts that he was a Tanu Secretary. No doubt these people accepted the word of the  appellant, which of course turned to be nothing but bogus. From the totality of the evidence I see no reason to differ from the finding of the learned magistrate. The appellant was also rightly convicted insofar as these counts are concerned.”  (3) On count eleven, “the appellant is alleged to have obtained Shs.6/= by false pretences from one Raphael Kabuye. I fail to see how the learned resident magistrate came to find that the appellant was guilty on this count. Raphael, the complainant, was on the day of hearing the case, registering a conviction on this count clearly took and accepted hearsay evidence. This was improper. There is, I agree, strong suspicion that the appellant also collected money from Raphael, but suspicion no matter how strong cannot be the basis of a conviction in a criminal charge.” (4) “As for the sentences imposed, I first deal with count one. All through the proceedings the appellant has been facing a charge of simple stealing c/s 265.  At no stage of the proceedings was the charge in count one amended to read that the appellant was charged with stealing c/s 265 and 271 of the Penal Code instead of simple stealing c/s 265 of the Penal Code.”  (5)  Conviction on count eleven set aside.  6 months imprisonment in respect of counts one.