Philip & Others v. Mkama. (PC) Civ. App. 226-M-69; 23/2/70; Kimicha J.

 

Philip & Others v. Mkama. (PC) Civ. App. 226-M-69; 23/2/70; Kimicha J.

The respondents claimed Shs. 800/- by way of compensation for being assaulted by the respondents. On the day in question, a certain lady was found by the villagers, in possession of stolen fishing nets. While the villagers were forcing the lady to carry the nets to the court; the respondent appeared and tried to defend her; whereupon the people set upon him and beat him up. He identified the appellants among those who he said had assaulted him. His testimony was supported by two other witnesses.

The lower court, both the assessors and the trial magistrate believed that the respondent had a good case against the appellants but refused to give judgment in his favour because the appellants, who had been previously charged with assaulting the respondent, were acquitted in a criminal case. The District court reversed this judgment.

            Held: (1) “I am ….. in agreement with the District Court that  the primary court dismissed the complainant’s claim on a wrong principle in that the burden of proof in criminal proceedings is different from that of civil proceedings. In the criminal proceedings the prosecution was the State whereas in this case the plaintiff is the complainant himself. But the most important point in favour of the complainant is that the primary court and his assessors were in fact satisfied that he had established his claim and they would have given judgment in his favour had it not been for their misunderstanding of the law.” (2) Appeal dismissed.