R. v. Juma s/o Rashid, Crim. Rev. 36-DDM-72, 3/6/72.

 R. v. Juma s/o Rashid, Crim. Rev. 36-DDM-72, 3/6/72.

            MNZAVZS, J. The two accuseds were charged with and convicted of stealing from motor-vehicle c/ss 269 (c) and 265 of the Penal Code and each sentenced to 2 years imprisonment. There can be no doubt that the conviction was based on clear and ample evidence. This court is not however all that sure that the sentence in respect of the 1^st accused, in the surrounding circumstances of the case ought to have been the same as that imposed on the 2^nd accused. The amount of property and money stolen was no doubt big. The total value amounted to Shs. 3,118/=. Because of this, severe sentences were clearly indicated. But, notwithstanding this aggravating circumstance, the learned resident magistrate failed to see that the first accused needed to be treated more leniently than the 2^nd accused. The record shows that the 1^st accused was a first offender whereas the 2^nd accused had a similar previous conviction last year. Some leniency in sentencing should always be exercised in respect of first offenders. The sentence in respect of the 1^st accused, which sentence is not supported by the Republic is reduced to 18 moths imprisonment. The sentence in respect of the 2^nd accused is to stand and is hereby confirmed.