Korosso, J.: These two appeals Nos. 131/87 and 132/87 have been consolidated and C will conveniently be dealt with collectively. The Appellants were jointly charged with two offences. In the lst Count they were charged with the offence of burglary c/s.294 (1) of the Penal Code. The Appellants were convicted of both counts and each sentenced to 5 D years imprisonment for the 2nd Count. The Appellants are appealing to this Court against convictions and sentences.
Mr. Oswald the learned state attorney who appeared for the Republic supported the convictions registered against the Appellants. E
The Appellants challenged the finding of the learned trial magistrate as having been based on mistaken identification.
The evidence on the lower Court's record was such as to leave no doubts in the mind of the trial magistrate as to the identification of the Appellants by one Mbula Mayege F (PW.1) one Madulu Shibi (PW.2) and one Devota Magembe (PW.3). There was a lamp light illuminating the house. In the case of Devota Magembe (PW.3) she had been awake at 11.15 p.m. on 17/8/86 when the Appellants broke into the house. In the case G of the 1st Appellant was taking a lamp then burning in the house. All these witnesses, PW.1, PW.2 and PW.3 knew the Appellants thoroughly before the incidence having been a resident of the village of Matalambuli. It is in evidence that when the villagers went to the scene, PW.1, PW.2 and PW.3 not only mentioned the Appellants but also H by their names and the clothes they had put on, so that when the Appellants appeared at the scene feigning as good samaritans were promptly arrested, there and then.
I am satisfied that these appeals have no any substantial cause for complainant, justifying I this Court to disturb the convictions rightly made.
I would therefore uphold the convictions and confirm the sentences of 5 years each. A
Appeal dismissed.
B
________________