Daniel Mtunze v. R., Crim. App. 245-D-68, 7/6.68, Saudi J.

Daniel Mtunze v. R., Crim. App. 245-D-68, 7/6.68, Saudi J.

Accused was convicted of fraudulent false accounting [P.C. s. 317(c)] and stealing by public servant [P.C. ss. 265, 270]. He had sold radio licences on behalf of he E.A.P.T.A. to nine individuals each of whom paid the sum of Shs. 20/-; he retained for his own purposed the money so collected. In order to conceal his actions, he omitted to enter correctly these nine separate transactions, Accused was given two consecutive sentences of 2 years and 24 strokes under the Minimum Sentences Act, though he claimed exemption from its provision by virtue of his age, which he alleged to be 47 years.

Held: (1) The convictions of false accounting and theft by public servant were supported by the facts. [Citing R. V. Sefu Salum @ Ngomba, Crim. Rev. No. 72 of 1965]. However, the charges ought to have been brought in nine separate counts. Thus, since the sum involved in each such count would have been less than Shs. 100/-, and accused was a first offender, the court should have considered section 5(2) of the Act, the provision for leniency. (2) The court may not impose a sentence of corporal punishment upon an accused who claims exemption by reason of age without first obtaining the findings of a medical examination. (3)The sentences on the two counts here were incorrectly made to run consecutively. As they arose out of the same transaction, they should be concurrent. Original conviction quashed and sentence passed thereon set aside; conviction on nine separate counts of each offence originally charged substituted, and concurrent sentences of 6 months’ imprisonment imposed.