Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TZHC

19930811 TZHC Mwanza

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The conviction was quashed because there was no admissible evidence establishing that the appellant assisted a person known to be guilty of an offence, nor was there proof that the alleged principal offender had committed an offence.

Court disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • conviction quashed
  • sentence set aside
  • immediate release of the appellant unless otherwise lawfully held

02

Material facts

Parties

Francis s/o Chacha

Appellant Counsel: Mr. Kabangwa

The United Republic

Respondent Counsel: Mr. Rutaisire

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The appellant argued that the evidence on record did not establish the offence of accessory after the fact and that there was no proof that he assisted a person known to be guilty of an offence.
Respondent
The respondent declined to support the conviction, implicitly conceding the insufficiency of evidence.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Section 387 of the Penal Code

    A person is guilty of being an accessory after the fact if he receives or assists another, knowing that person to be guilty of an offence, in order to enable him to escape punishment.

  2. 02

    General criminal law principle

    Conviction must be based on legal and admissible evidence establishing all essential elements of the offence.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The conviction was quashed because there was no admissible evidence establishing that the appellant assisted a person known to be guilty of an offence, nor was there proof that the alleged principal offender had committed an offence.

Obiter and limits

  • It takes evidence which is legally admissible in a court of law to convict a person of a crime.

Court disposition

appeal allowed

  • conviction quashed
  • sentence set aside
  • immediate release of the appellant unless otherwise lawfully held

Source and reliance status

TZHC · 11 August 1993

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

TZHC

Judgment· 11 August 1993

19930811 TZHC Mwanza

AT r1i'TA.NZA APPELLATE JURISDICTIO:T HIGH COURT CRIIfINAL APfEAL :ii"O. 435 OF 1991 ( Origil1aJ. Crirr,inal Case i:Jo~ 400 of 1'7Si of JG:2e Distl'io:~ Court o:f Serengeti ·Distl'ic-i; at Muguimi :Sefo:;.•e.:: J.B. J.lliAGA:,~A Esq., .9 i)t"" -:.----:i.c•i; Magistrate) FB.Al\J"CIS s/o CB:ACIIA t i g g APP:E:LLAWT Versus T::=:E liliTI1'ED REPUBLIC g : : g s t c i & i g : : z RE3PONDErTT .TuDGMENT The dis·~riot court of Serengeti a:t I::1[,Ts1u met~d out a s/o Cha.eh~ consequen·i; upon a conVid;iol1 fo:;:, Assesso:ry after i4a__fact, contrary to sec·tion 387 o2 t:10 Pe.aal Code., .Je was aPqu.itted of Cattle tb.ef't.9 contrary fo sec-:;ion 268 of t.!ie Penal to section 273(b) of -~he Pe.!'.lal Code,.· The appellant, who was the 0hai17.2a,;.1 o1 EbalimbaJ.i village, 1 had been jointly ch3Xged wi_-l;b. his two ool1 leaders, J.farw-a s/o I:I:rango and lfasana s/o Ifarwa9 as ·~lie .f.i~~ second and t.1.:ird. .. a.ccUGed, respectively, who were a,eqci.·;;·;;ecl oi: all thJ counts. Feeling aggrieved by bo'ch conviction a.:::C:. sa..-ite.nce.9 tl...e appellant has 110w corrie to this court. The 1 earned advocate for tb.e a;ppcllant,· Mr. Kabangwa_, arcnecl. the appeal before me, in the prcs0:10 0 of the 1 earned J 2 a,cYooate for the Republic, Mr,. Rutaisi2G, w'.J_o decli:1eo_ to sup:::iorl" lice:.1oee,1 oat,tle dealer. In t;·w afto:;_--::00:1 o:? Au.,.g,_ist ?7\.½. ·;991 ~\i.-:-..a:ie

PW1 was grazing his 20 heads o:i:' ov::;-:;10 in tJ1e pastur~s~ .Auosi went there with 41 b.eads of oattl0 a;.1d as]::ed 1-~uhab.., PW1 a;_:,r, ella.."l.t arri vccl there., Re was with -'!i;ro sti.:1gusungu co::B.,a.i::.de:;:-s, Jose,:.i PW3 and Salim PW4$ He asked :1i.!.1a~Jo ?r.?'1 where he cot t.'.10 41 head:3 of cattle vhich did not belo:":.g ta t'iat villaco .. I.h_i.:1..a,be PW1, replied tha:'c tb.e:r were b:;_•011[.'lr:; °'.rJ ~us uncle A.i11osi. ·~o t~10 COM Office. On ·[;~1e wa;J, t::.e a;.:i~H~lJ_a,n-i:; c2:.a..,.._;ed !:!.is Dind., a:1.cl_ dir~ted. PW3 anc1 ·nt-4- .,;o \.J:i·'~~~;{:~.:;~1-0. oQ;'.;·~ie :co ;.,,~os. Ar:iosi a:::.d. t~10 cattle ·a;re st'_t,.ii ii_~- t~_~_::~_i·>=·Dage~ _· ..- :.-· ;:)/\.;~~_..,:.~:f _; .·.l With respect~-~ agree.14-it·~·to-tll loa:r~1-ed c6m1sels -~11at -;;~1/.,:.- eV:i.cla~1ce on record f.oll short, by :f2..:r, o::.' establishinG an off311ce ol~c;ed. undo:r section 387 of tb.e PeLaJ. Coc:e., A person :is guilty -~ of a,:1 offence ru1de:r tb.in section who l.'3Ceives or assists a11oil:c:2, ·w:10 is, to .his la.1owlodge, guilty o:f ai.: oi'fmce, in order to . e;.12}.-ils him escape pu..YJ.ishmont. a.11 -:i.'..1-e essential 0l0::10,1ts of the o:'.:'fe,:oo o.'.:.arged we~ , .. ·, EJ3J~ablisllect. to the required extent. 1::10111 edgc on th~ ' t:10 aypell's.nt that .Amos has stolen ·t:.ce ca·~-tle was not/ It uas not s.b.o.,ii.1 !:lo,;;

JL"ilosi uas guilty o:? a.:i o:ffonco~ l 3 1 · lioc~1oed cattie dealer.. l1ll~ cattle c'.id no·~ "!Jelong --.,Go the MbaliLibaJ.i -Vilk,.ge as alleged. il1 t:.ie charge ·sheet, L::. fact, the ovinersbip also accou.nt for- ·i;he f2..ot -'Gb.a:ii Amosi w;:i,n 11ai•\'1or charged nor called. as a witness despite that he w~s i;.1 "&1e village,. !ie had .,, appellai1t had assisted Amosi to escape pt:.i.ua:::iment. It takes evidence which is .legaJJ. ;;r adiJ.is·sibie-in a 001-1.rt o:t law ·i;o convict a p'3I'so:1 of a crime. Si10:1 evid.e:.1ce .'.las to Such eV:idenc e, it would appear, 'Go·i;aJ_J.y lz.a)::ed in this case, a:1cl 3,ppellant of an offence w11ich was noJ.; estaolishecl in evidence,.; \ L1 the event, I allow the appeal, quash the conviction~ se·~ aside the sentanoe, . and. hereby o:rcle:r-t>.::: iIJ;;,edi.ate release oi' ttlo appella,."'lt 1 Fra:1cis s/o Cha.cha, unlesc ot:.1G1.--.,ri.so la.w:fdly \- .... -r ,Ml"TANZA · August 11th 1993 · For Appellant: Absent For Republic g Mr. Ru:i:ia.:isire ._ I

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Section 387 of the Penal Code

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Section 268 of the Penal Code

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Section 273(b) of the Penal Code

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.