Elija Manda v People (Appeal No. 65 of 1987) [1988] ZMSC 84 (9 August 1988)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA Appeal No. 65 of 1987 HOLDEN,AT LUSAKA-: · : , ; ,· i , ·, ; ;. , 5,-:·rd .:.if \J;\: .·, i ;\ j ~l -.;·•:·r.;~,; {·i:.~ :",ni':i )'f•J,:·-.:~·.;it -~S ·•.1-J~injt " . ·,' . I • • • j I ··. ,, . - V - J • 1 , ::,t. .. · i _; ; • ,!~E · r,~q~L~,: 1 : , , • . ':i .1:~l~l:ir.:-;:~ 1 i •· ,::, ,.. • • ;·:,-.: ~; r ";jr,,d : !1., t ?;-;~); i. ·:, :, i · ! ~ '. ;~~s~1'!~~~i \ ,,.,,h,::,± CORAM: Ngulube. Ag. C. J •• Gardner, Ag. O. C. J •• . and _Cha~la, Ag.j .$. . - · · ·•. ··· :: · ·. :;._ , : , _, . ·, c ~!Uil :il~ !. J0 'Lr~:.:. Lt'r! ; .·.\-•:•,; n(:_: ;~i:G ·-:;(::,,:•.~:th,:Aµgu~ti::J9~~L:•::: mid ·::: i<; S. K. Munthali, Senior, L~gal, Aid Cou_nse,l_, ,fQr;t~!!'-app~llant, 1. _; (:':t :., .. ; N. Si vakumaran, Ass·i stant Sen lor, State A~v_ocate ,_:,for! ~he respon_dent :,: r•: u . ' ' ' . . j • • • - ' ' ' . . . . • • .. ,, .... . ' • . f ~ . The ,app_ellant wa~ sentenced ·to undergo -'forty;.;ffve' ·years''t i.fi•~ Ugh . imprisonment with hard 1 abour: after being' 'found · gui ! ty' 1of1 ·one charge of aggravated robbery~ ·.- The particulars· of ihe ·offericevwere· that· on:'21st December. 01984:,at Ch1b1zyl Multi Purpose:· co..;operative rsociety.' in the Kalamo district, jointly ·and whilst 'acting:together: with ,other·persons unknown and ·being annad with a gun, stole ·K45··,ooo.rodd 'in cheques and K28,000 odd in cash ·and that· at· the time ·of stealing u'sed or'th're.atened to use violence against PW.2 :. There was· evide.nce ·1n·· th.ls case :th'at'1·Pw1, a watchman, was on duty guard fog · the depot premises·:'on· the nlght fo· question when three robb~s arrived in a vanette~>·They· assaulted :'.i .y: him and forced him to take them· into the: office.' :-rhere· was· i'n th'e•': office PW2, the Manager, who· was·· spending the' night in ·the office' with'~: PW3, a female sales person for the same· Cooperative.'·.· Then were·· also"'; assaulted. PW2 was finally forced to surrender the· keys· to the safe:·: and the robbers took off •1th the cash anditheicheques.\·All·the witnesses agreed that the ·robbers; were dressed'.1n'ove'r:alls·? and that•::< one of them' wore a'-dust; coat:, as weIH:' :; .· l :,~ ~'Ji ;;,,:;:1(':~~· 'i :_;;·:Jie:' i•·::_,',;,'.;(j · i. ,;>•": '.· . • 1, ~- . , ;•,;·::··_ · • >.,, ··.·0 th.- r~.:. :.~ .. °' ~f ;~,~ • ::t,·121,.-.,h.~r.:;'.~~On -.:_:~,:-' LitirG ·i)· .. : .~.;';~j ct1-e-guc:~ to L?. C;1~ Jtnd th(' I ' . . . ' ' ' \ ( I • • • ' ' ' ' I . I , · . , . • • • l : ' • • • • • • ' ' ' ' ' • • • , , . . . . . . . ' • • • • • • • ·• , .- - ' ~• '· .,. •• . •. . •. ; . • • • 1.· · '· \ ' ••. • .., ; • . • • ' . . ! ~ - , r ,· ' ,. ' . ,,•.~ ·• •-· •· i"" • I '; . ' , ' ! . .,,. • - •• ( . . ~ •'• ( j ,,. I < ' • ~,.. ,., . . , ' • i I • ! .' ~ ', . ,(• . ., 1. i. t I . . .. 1,, .• ~ •. -~· ·. ~ , • •• . · . ' '., ... , . . \;{".,,} ... _.l. :. j ~♦ '-'~.• ... • • .._.•\,I • .:. · On behalf: of. the appell~n~:;~r.•:,~u~~h.aJ_1,.,"ts~flJ9t. Le~~.~ i. ~i,tr";l!:_:,i•. Counsel, has quite properly indicated t~at.hi~• onlY::argument is.against the sen~en~e. He has c;on~ended t_hat;-the. sentence. ~as .. wrpng in ,: : 1 ,.,,.-. principle having regard to th~ f'.ac~. tha~ ~t1ts.-;~as:.i.~.-~!rr.tPre1_ c,.a~~,~!U:;n. aggravated robbery involving a -first offender. The appellant advanced an argument in person :against the convicti.on.". He._ arg_ued-tha:t_ PWs. 1, 2 and 3 were liars in that· while one of. them, said-, that .. he was, arited, with a stick, the other said he _had ·a gun .\'/~,Ue -the t~ird s~_id,-h~ ~aq:L: an iron bar. we have taken into account these._submissions and it .is· quite clear that the learned trial judge did;not .accept that a.gun was us~d. However. • he, did._ accept that . a -weapon, of .. some kind in;• the_ form. of a bar was, used.. T~e _ _. ~pp~Uant ;.a~so_J::o.mpl_~i-~s i~_h_at. tf1t,w'.it~,e_s.s~-~ did nQ~ describe the; ~Jothes .. wor~~Pl:l~,l ~-~~ r~~-~er~. s~lrl.~.e9uen:~ ,to:,;~~j; robbery. There.wa.s no _merit i.n ;t~~' ap~~~~; ~g~i~~}~--t_he.~~nvJ_c:t.~.9n. The thrE:!e prosec·ution wi tne~SE!S, --~!\~t:J~ ,f,tt~·;,t, tgi ~, ~h~ ,w,.er,~1 ~OA: . victims in -the -robbery, all had .. an .. oppo~_unity.-,to 6bserVi .1:~~"app_ellant at the depot since the app~llant a~d 111~,c~~federates had.left th~ of the vehicle on. A few hours later, PW·~ ... -;i' and 3 recognised the . appellant on the road to Choma a short di.stance from the abandoned get-away car and this was while the appellant was'.bitchhiki~g with another robber and the witnesses were. on :the_ '!'.ay_ ,t.o, .:t!J~ .. poltc,~ ...• " .... -~ . . station. The descriptions given by the three witnesses··a1ready mentioned enabled PW6 1 a police officer, to· 1nmediately' suspect the appellant and another suspect to whom we shall refer ~or convenience as the first suspect. the fl rst suspect was recognised by PW2 ·and he· ·w'a"s ·found; Jn.· po_ss·ess'ion ·of .. a large sum· of cash whicfi-was. part of the'-istole1f!mooey: ::. It: was~"the. first suspect who led the police and the _witness . PW2 to the appeliant's house. The appellant attempted to prevent the.police· from en~ering the house and in fact assaulted an officer who had to. hit back and in the process dislodged two or three of the appeUant'-s, ·t~eth. •· ·The,••, · , · ~ • appellant was also found with a large suni of-:casJ')-,after he had:c claimed that he only had a smaller sum of money. The -evidence further showed that it was the appellant who revealed who the third suspect was and it was the appellant.•s wife who went with the police to the t~ird suspect 1s village where the rest of the cash, ch~gues, LPOs and the _When the police went to Zambia €'0mpQtmd. P'la l • :.') -' . . .•~~,..·t ,--r~ ·:i!~- ·.: ut •; • ,1:T· . . ' . :' i: . ... ,.,,. ◄ . C.,, l ~ ~ ,•. /1 . . ~.,~ . :- ' ' ' ' ,, - ~ f lightf · · 3/ ••••• -••• ~ .. . ...... . .. :1 , I J3 , ,· ' . ..1,:·'i "· .. i '! .,'f- 7 ' - '., ·--··-· - ·-,---.. ·- ,_.., '·1 1- :-~ :• ( ~ -;~ over·all.s,: and dustcoat worn by the robbers were found. Oddly enough, :\• when all the money_ was.added together it totalled the amount stolen in· the robb~r~. The evidence to support the conviction of the appellant was simply overwhelming. We.dismiss the appeal against t~e .. c;:onviction . . ' . ' . , ' . . . . ~ ~I , , . ' •~·J: . . 'l,~i S:~ ,, With regard to the __ app~a(against the sentence of forty-five . : • t . . ' ( . . !"t ,:·: .' '. . . '· . ~ . ';-". ~ - ' - •• .: : : . . • ' ~- ,, ' 1 .:.. \ ' 0 1 . • ,··· ' .. ,,, . _years we do have to agree that the sentence induc.es a profound sense of shock. While actual violenc~ ~as used·~gainst Pws1; 2 and'3~and wh11£ it is true that some injury was inflicted th(:!re_·was'nothing in .. the· . circumstances or the facts, of th 1 s case: to ··warrant ·such· an: extravagant sentence. · ··The appeal .against, sentence ts·'al lowed:' and: we set ·-aside:.the sentence of forty-five _ye1rs . .... w~ . .must now .. c::_hQQ_S_e_ ~n _apRr.9.pfi_a.~~------- ... .. sentence. As already noted violence was used and there· was a gang; those factors together with .the:_ fact~Jhat . so~e injurY. J'i'.a:i __ c:_t1~S1:!~-----·••m..:~ inmediately attracts a .senterice-~q~ewh~t,hig~er thar the mandatory minimum. We impose a sentence of twenty-five years imprisonment with hard l~bour;_.wit~ eff_~<:f ~ ~~:M!EC!'it:-jJP9§•i;__;:-·tt~f1 ve;· ye1ff~ .. . .. •·,fj , .. ,, ;'-,-,•;n;, -F~r,.,u ,~ 1•{· l-/''--1 :i:,f l'l1'_': c~'~•~g,-. . ....i - ·· . . ,· - VI ·.· .,:!, ~~ -;-- t-:;--:·: 1~··( ' ~-~~·)\~(: il~f·) --?)-i:·i·i: .on 2 !~!. ~ I :•.' 1 t.. ' ,t ., '.i, ···""' ;,""' ◄ : "'~ It 1 ,_.,., • \I !..,/ . ; ► ;_: i •• • • . \ ( • ' ' I ' . . . ' • I. ,. (_) • , .. , .... , •, , • I 1.,, ,'; B. - l~~ Gardner . , ,, d rr i, ~:,:.-~·: \ ·i :i tb'."~ ACTING DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE ;~ i :· i {';~ ,. ! ;,:~,': \ .·· • ! I ; 0 'i ii ;_:': ' ,·. I,(?! _·--: • 11 " •• -, l.· • ·' ,, ., •. : . • • . ., 1.d' '- ., ..; t_,... ,c,..l. i,JC'"i ,;, ·f-(' ~ ·•---1·..., ... , .... A . , ti..~ ·.k' 'e•-Y"' ~a i•"'n _,.a:,,,,, . , ; ~'<:1 :i M~ ris. ,·<chatla ···································· _, ACTING SUPREME ,COURT . JUDGE-_ ;:,1,,,, 1\: :_ :G. ! ~ I vn.- ,.\·i,;;. • ;:. - ,.. . "\,; : I ._ • ., i , ; ~ ' • '... ; ; '