Juma Mkurasi v. R., Crim. App. 627-M-68, 15/11/68, Bramble J.

 

Juma Mkurasi v. R., Crim. App. 627-M-68, 15/11/68, Bramble J.

Five people arrived in Bukoba, debarking from the S.S. “Victoria”, and went to a bus service booking station to by tickets for Ngara. Being informed that the bus would leave the next day; they were attracted by an offer by a man, later identified at the accused, to take them to a bus which was leaving that night from a place some distance away. He took them in two groups to a dark place in his small car. There, two other men appeared claiming to be policemen looking for Uganda currency, which they said was prohibited in Tanzania. These, two other men appeared claiming to be policemen looking for Uganda currency, which they said was prohibited in Tanzania. These men took money from the passenger and gave it to the man identified as the accused. The passengers, believing that they were policemen, allowed the search and seizure of the money; they subsequently went to a house with the policemen, who went off. The accused was convicted of robber, the magistrate construing s. 285 of the Penal Code to mean that “when more than one person commit the offence, as here, the use of actual force is not necessary. Their being more than one is enough to create the fear of such a nature intended to overpower the party robbed”.  

Held: (1) Section 285 of the Penal Code merely provides for greater punishment where a robbery is committed by more than one person acting together. The use of actual force, or the threat of immediate actual force, is nonetheless a necessary element of the offence.

            (2) “The evidence clearly discloses a common intent between the accused and the other men and each is responsible for what was done in furtherance of that intent.

Assuming that the two unknown men were policemen they can be said to have committed an unlawful trespass …. In that judicial notice can be taken of the fact that Uganda Currency is not prohibited in Tanzania. They ….. Were not acting in the course of their duties. The evidence therefore supports a case of stealing”. Conviction for stealing substituted.