REPUBLIC v ELIPHAS JACOB 1984 TLR 345 (HC)

REPUBLIC v ELIPHAS JACOB 1984 TLR 345 (HC)

Court High Court of Tanzania - Dodoma

Judge Maina J

April 21, 1983

C CRIMINAL REVISION 4 OF 1983

Flynote

Transport Licensing Act, 1973 - Charge under s. 10(1)(a) -Charge does not state

whether goods carried were for D hire or in connection with accused's business -

Whether offence disclosed.

-Headnote

The accused was convicted, on his own plea of guilty, of using a motor vehicle to

carry goods in E connection with business. The charge was laid under s.10(1)(a) of

the Transport Licensing Act, 1973. The facts as stated by the prosecution and which

the accused admitted did not indicate whether the goods were for hire or in

connection with the accused's business.

F Held: In order to convict a person under s.10(1) of the Transport Licensing Act,

1973 it must be established that the goods were for hire or reward.

Case Information

G Conviction quashed.

No case referred to.

[zJDz]Judgment

Maina, J.: The accused was convicted, on his own plea of guilty, of using a motor

vehicle to carry goods H in connection with business. He was conditionally

discharged, under S.38 of the Penal Code, for a period of six months.

After the charge was read over to him, the accused stated "It is true". The facts as

stated by the prosecution and which the accused admitted were these. On 17.4.82 the

accused was driving an Isuzu I tipper and he was stopped by a Police Constable who

found that the accused was "carrying goods without TLB licence." There is no

1984 TLR p346

indication anywhere in those facts what those goods were and whether they were in

connection with the A accused's business, or whether they were for hire. The

charge against the accused was laid under Section 10(1)(a) of the Transport Licensing

Act, No.1 of 1973 which states that: B

Subject to the provisions of Sub-Section (6) no person shall, except under or in

accordance with the terms of a licence -

(a) use a goods vehicle or a public service vehicle for the carriage of goods for

hire or reward or for or in connection C with any trade or business carried on by

him.

Now, the facts as stated by the prosecutor did not show whether the goods carried by

the accused were for "hire or reward" or whether they were "in connection with

business carried on by him". The fact that D accused had no licence is not enough to

convict. All that the facts showed were that the accused carried goods in the vehicle.

That was not enough to convict him under section 10(1) of the Transport Licensing

Act, 1973. The facts should have gone further and establish whether the goods were

for hire or reward or E whether they were in any way connected with the accused's

business. Since this was not disclosed, the facts were not enough to establish the

offence charged.

For these reasons, the conviction is quashed and the order of conditional discharge is

set aside. F

Conviction quashed.

1984 TLR p346

G