Joseph Lelo v. R., Crim. App. 139-A-68, 23/1/69, Platt J.

Joseph Lelo v. R., Crim. App. 139-A-68, 23/1/69, Platt J.

            The appellants Joseph Lelo and Hamisi Juma were jointly convicted of robbery contrary to sections 285 and 286 of the Penal Code and sentenced to the minimum sentence. As the complainant, Mrs. Moshi, was waiting to get into her car which her husband was unlocking, the two appellants approached her and the appellant Hamisi snatched her handbag and got it free from her arm while the appellant Joseph impeded her path while she was trying to run after Hamisi.

            Held: The fact that the appellant Hamisi used force to take the handbag away did not in these circumstances amount to robbery. Mrs. Moshi’s evidence was as follows: - “I with my husband stood while talking, and when I wanted to enter in the car, the first accused came and snatched my handbag and ran away. The second accused was behind me, he tried to obstruct me so I may not catch the other one.” The learned Magistrate understood the evidence as meaning that while snatching the handbag Hamisi used force to cause Mrs. Moshi to release her handbag. But there was no evidence that there had been any struggle or that Mrs. Moshi had been injured in any way. It is true that sometimes the line between mere stealing from a person and robbery may be fine, as the cases collected under paragraph 1768 in Archbold Criminal Appeal Evidence and Practice 36^th Ed. Indicate. But on the facts of this case, the Republic conceded that there was no real evidence of that force being used, which is required in the offence of robbery as defined in the Penal Code. On this ground the appeals must be successful.” Convictions for stealing from person c/s 269(a), Penal Code, substituted and sentences of 12 months awarded.