Dabili s/o Mani v. R. Crim. App. 239-A-68, 4/2/69, Platt J.

Dabili s/o Mani v. R. Crim. App. 239-A-68, 4/2/69, Platt J.

The appellant was convicted of unlawful wounding c/s 228(1), Penal Code, and sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment. His appeal was admitted solely on the question of sentence.

Held: (1) “The learned Magistrate stated, that he had fixed a minimum for all cases of unlawful wounding of 12 months’ imprisonment, as a deterrent, because of the prevalence of such cases. This is probably an unfortunately worded approach. But apart from that, it would amount to misdirection if the learned Magistrate refused to take into account proper mitigation in favour of an accused.”

            (2) “In this case the appellant, a first offender aged 25 years, stated that he had been attacked first by the complainant. The Prosecution accepted that fact. In his petition of appeal the appellant explains that the quarrel arose over the fact that the appellant’s wife had left him and gone to live with the complainant. When the appellant referred to this matter at a pombe party, the complainant was annoyed and hit the appellant with a stick. The appellant disarmed him and retaliated. The complainant was injured over the forehead and hand according to the medical report; but this amounted to simple harm, their being no fractures. Not all the facts were apparently put to the learned Magistrate but the fact that there was provocation and the nature of the wounds were matters which he had to take into account. In the circumstances, the sentenced is manifestly excessive and I substitute a term of 4 months imprisonment.”