Moshua s/o Mduna v. R., Crim. App. 922-D-67, 19/1/68, Georges C. J.
Accused was convicted of assault and causing actual bodily harm. The evidence left no reasonable doubt as to his guilt, but a fine of Shs. 400/- was imposed without enquiry by the court into the financial means of the accused. Further, the case had been transferred from primary court to resident magistrate’s court upon complainant’s statement that she wished to retain an advocate. Accused alleged that this was done to permit prosecution by an advocate who was related to complainant, before a magistrate who was of complainant’s tribe. The magistrate, in fact, was a member of complainant’s tribe, but the prosecutor was not related to her.
Held: (1) The fact that the magistrate may have been of the same tribe as complainant cannot affect the conviction, since that fact “… does not appear in any way to have influenced the matter …” (2) “Before imposing fine a court should make enquiries of the financial standing of the accused, and this should form part of the record.” [Quoting R. v. Bison s/o Mwango, 2 T. L. R. (R) . 31,32]. This should be done to ensure that the fine is one “which is within the means of the accused person to pay.” (3) A man convicted of striking a woman should pay compensation even though there is no permanent injury, since striking a woman “is not a manly act.” Fine reduced to Shs. 200/-
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.