Ramadhani s/o Athumani v. R., Crim. App. 872-D-67, 20/12/67, Biron J.
Accused was charged with 10 counts of forgery [P.C. ss. 333, 337], 10 counts of uttering false documents [P.C. ss. 342, 337] and 10 counts of stealing [P.C. s. 265]. He was convicted as charged on the first twenty counts but convictions for stealing by a person employed in the public service [P.C. ss. 270, 265] were substituted with respect to the last 10 counts. There was evidence that accused, who was a village executive officer, wrongfully issued permits to brew pombe and appropriated the shs. 5/- fee for his own use. He had no authority to issue such permits, but gave each applicant a receipt from a receipt book which he had wrongfully retained. The charges in the first twenty counts alleged that he had forged and uttered false receipts
Held: (1) Accused could properly have been convicted of forging an uttering false pombe permits. However, the receipts which he issued were unequivocally what they purported to be receipts for the payment of Shs. 5/- and were not false documents within the meaning of Penal Code section 335. (2) The defective charges on the first twenty counts are not curable. (3) The monies never came into the possession of the Government, nor were they received on behalf of the government since accused had no authority to issue pombe permits. (4) For the foregoing reason, and because the offence was not charged, the convictions for stealing by public servant cannot be sustained. (5) The persons paying the fees did so willingly and voluntarily. Therefore, the offence against them was obtaining money by false pretences rather than theft. Convictions for forgery and uttering quashed. Convictions of obtaining by false pretences substituted for the theft convictions.
0 Comments
PLACE YOUR COMMENT HERE
WARNING: DO NOT USE ABUSIVE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.
THE COMMENTS OF OUR READERS IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY.