Africa-Press – Tanzania. FORMER accountant with Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority (Tazara) Stewart Mwangalaba (46) appeared before the Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court in Dar es Salaam yesterday charged with obtaining over 843m/- from his employer by false pretences.
Mwangalaba is alleged to have pretended to his employer that the amount was genuinely paid to him as per diem and travel imprest, something which was false.
He denied the charge before Principal Resident Magistrate Rita Tarimo. The magistrate granted bail to the accountant on strict bail conditions of depositing in court cash bail of 421,924,666/- being half of the amount alleged to have been fraudulently obtained. Alternatively, the magistrate directed the accused person to surrender in court a title deed of immovable property which is certified to have a value of the amount in question.
She also ordered the accused to secure two sureties, who live in Dar es Salaam and must sign a bond of 50m/- each. Furthermore, the magistrate restricted the accused to leave the Dar es Salaam region, which is the jurisdiction of the court, unless he is granted permission by the same court to do so.
The case was adjourned to August 13, 2021 for another mention, as investigations into the matter, according to the prosecution, led by State Attorney Yusuph Aboud, have not been completed. Prosecuting, the trial attorney told the court that the accused person committed the offence on different dates between January 1, 2017 and October 30m 2018.
The court heard that within the same period at Tazara Head Office, knowingly and fraudulently, the accountant obtained 843,849,332/- by falsely pretending that the money was genuinely paid to him as per diem and safari imprest, the fact which was untrue. Before his arraignment, the accused person was facing an economic case involving the same amount before Principal Resident Magistrate Huruma Shaidi.
In that case, the accused was facing an economic count of money laundering. However, the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) decided to withdraw the entire case by entering nolle prosequi certificate in favour of the accused person.
The DPP entered the certificate under section 91(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA), showing no interest to prosecute the accused in the matter. The provision cited by the DPP does not operate as a bar from him to re-arrest and charge the accused person with a criminal charge containing the same facts.
The provision reads, “In any criminal case and at any stage thereof before verdict or judgment, as the case may be, the Director of Public Prosecutions may enter a nolle prosequi, either by stating in court or by informing the court concerned in writing on behalf of the Republic that the proceedings shall not continue; “…..and thereupon the accused shall at once be discharged in respect of the charge for which the nolle prosequi is entered, and if he has been committed to prison shall be released, or if on bail his recognisances shall be discharged; but such discharge of an accused person shall not operate as a bar to any subsequent proceedings against him on account of the same facts.
Having received the certificate in question, the magistrate accepted the prosecution’s decision and discharged the accused forthwith. However, the accountant was rearrested and later re-arraigned facing the normal criminal case before another magistrate. Nolle prosequi is legal Latin meaning “to be unwilling to pursue”.
In Common wealth and US common law, it is used for prosecutors’ declarations that they are voluntarily ending a criminal case before trial or before a verdict is rendered.
