REPUBLIC v JOSEPH MATEO 1985 TLR 227 (HC)

REPUBLIC v JOSEPH MATEO 1985 TLR 227 (HC)

Court High Court of Tanzania - Tanga

Judge Sisya J

March 7, 1983

CRIMINAL REVISION 15 OF 1982

Flynote

Criminal Practice and Procedure - Assault causing grievous harm - Three

complainants B injured in the same assault - Whether constituting one or three

separate offences.

-Headnote

The accused was charged with assault causing grievous harm contrary to s. 225 of the

C Penal Code but the facts showed only the offence of unlawful wounding and the

trial court convicted him accordingly. But, although three people were injured in the

same assault, the accused was charged with and convicted of only one count. On

revision by the High Court.

Held: Even though there may have been only one assault, the fact that three different

D complainants were injured thereby constitutes three separate and distinct offences

which ought to have been charged in three separate counts and a separate conviction

entered for each count.

Case Information

Order accordingly. E

No cases referred to.

Judgment

Sisya, J.: The accused appeared before the learned Principal District F Magistrate,

Pangani, and pleaded not guilty to three counts of doing grievous harm contrary to

section 225 of the Penal Code. After a full trial the learned Principal District

Magistrate held that since the three complainants in each count were injured in the

same assault the accused ought to have been charged with a single count and not

three. He therefore, entered a verdict on only one count. G

With respect, this was wrong. Although, indeed, the evidence shows that the injuries

were inflicted by the accused on the complainants in the same assault each impact on

every one of the complainants was, however, in law, a separate and distinct assault or

offence. The same could not, therefore, properly be charged in a single count. H

In this judgment the learned Principal District Magistrate found that the established

facts proved the offence of unlawful wounding and not grievous harm. This, I hold, is

correct in respect of all the three complainants. The nature of injuries sustained by

the I complainants did not amount to grievous harm as defined by the law. As

aforesaid the learned Principal District Magistrate then entered a single conviction

under

1985 TLR p228

section 228 of the Penal Code in count one and proceeded to pass a single sentence A

thereon. This was wrong. In exercise of my powers in revision and, on my

evaluation of the evidence, I find the accused guilty not as charged but guilty of

unlawful wounding contrary to section 228 of the Penal Code in counts two and three

and I convict him accordingly.

Regarding sentence, the accused was sentenced to three months imprisonment in

count B 1. I also sentence him to three months imprisonment in Counts two and

three. Sentences on count 1, 2 and 3 to ran concurrently.

C Order accordingly

1985 TLR p228

D