Jumbe v. R. Crim. App. 158-A-70; 14/8/70; Bramble, J.

Jumbe v. R. Crim. App. 158-A-70; 14/8/70; Bramble, J.

The appellant was convicted in the District Court of Arusha of causing death by reckless driving contrary to section s 44A(1) and 70 of the Traffic Ordinance and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. The first ground of appeal was that the District Court has no jurisdiction to try cases under Section 44 (A) (1) of the Traffic Ordinance because under section 44 A (2): “An offence against this section may be tried in the court of a Resident Magistrate……. Only these proceedings originated in and were conducted by the District Court of Arusha. The presiding magistrate was a Resident Magistrate and it was submitted on behalf of the Republic that the fact that a Resident Magistrate presided made the court a court of a Resident Magistrate.

            Held: (1) “This point was decided by Biron. J. in a Dar es Salaam Appeal Taidin Allarakhia v. His Highness the Aga Khan App. No. 28 of 1968. This was appeal in a matter arising out of the Rent Restriction Act which conferred jurisdiction in the court of the Rent Restriction Act which conferred jurisdiction in the court of the Resident Magistrate. The matter was determined by the Senior Resident Magistrate sitting in the District Court and it was held that:- “The fact that a court is presided over by a magistrate of a particular grade does not, ipso facto, transform that  court into the class of the magistrate’s grade. It is expressly provided for in the Act that a class of court shall have its own register and its own prescribed soul.’ These instant procedures were heard and tried by the District Court of Dar es Salaam and the order and decree was issued from that court

bearing the seal of such court. Therefore, in my judgment, despite the fact that the court was presided over by a senior resident magistrate, the trial was, in fact, held on and the order and decree made by the District Court of Dar es Salaam, which court has, as indicated no jurisdiction to try such suit. This was a civil case but the questions of jurisdiction apply equally to criminal matters. With respect, I fully agree with the above arguments and I am fortified in this by the provisions of section 36 of the Magistrates’ Court Act which reads:- ‘A court of a resident magistrate shall have and exercise jurisdiction in all proceedings in respect of which jurisdiction is conferred by any law for the time being in force – (a) on a court of a resident magistrate; or (b) on a district court, or on a district court held by a resident magistrate or a civil magistrate, in the exercise of its original jurisdiction’. In addition the interpretation section of the act specified that a district magistrate includes a resident magistrate. A resident magistrate sitting in a district court can exercise only the jurisdiction of the district court and cannot for example; impose a penalty grater than is allowed to the district court. (2) Appeal allowed.