R. v. John Charles Haule, Crim. Sass. 54-Dodoma-69, Biron J.

R. v. John Charles Haule, Crim. Sass. 54-Dodoma-69, Biron J.

The accused was convicted of bigamy c/s 164, Penal Code. The sentence is reproduced below.

Held: “Like both learned counsel in the case, this is the first prosecution for bigamy to come before me, on this, my twentieth year on the bench in this country. The offence can not therefore, be said to be prevalent calling for a deferent sentence. Further, it could be contended that there is an element of discrimination, in that only a section of population could be prosecuted for such offence of bigamy. Whilst I appreciate that women must be protected, I feel that such protection should be available to all women and not just limited to a particular community or creed. However, the courts the courts do not make law. It is their duty to apply and enforce the law, as it is on the people to observe them. Even so, there is no call to, or justification for, making an example of the accused. Whatever punishment in imposed on him, will be borne by the two families he now has to support. Although his counsel has submitted that in his community it is customary to have several wives, the accused who is literate and intelligent, appreciates that he has broken the law and has expressed his contribution. I can only add that I hope that he will make amends to the two women he has wronged. In all the circumstances of this instant case – the first of its kind – in my experience, I consider that the justice of the case, will be met by discharging the accused – as I do under section 38 of the Penal code, conditional on his being of good behaviour for a period of twelve months.”