abdallah hamis kazuba vs attorney general and 4 others 2022 tzhc 14453 30 september 2022

abdallah hamis kazuba vs attorney general and 4 others 2022 tzhc 14453 30 september 2022

The affidavit in support of the application is incurably defective for containing hearsay information and lacking supplementary affidavits from persons mentioned; the defect renders the entire application incompetent.

Citation
abdallah hamis kazuba vs attorney general and 4 others 2022 tzhc 14453 30 september 2022
Parties
Applicant: Abdullah Hamis Kazuba; Respondent: The Attorney General; Respondent: Inspector General of Police; Respondent: Director of Criminal Investigations; Respondent: Regional Police Commander, Dodoma; Respondent: The Officer Commander Incharge
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
30 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Application struck out
Legal Topics
Affidavit Defects, Hearsay Evidence, Detention, Preliminary Objection
Source Language
English

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdullah Hamis Kazuba

Applicant

The Attorney General

Respondent

Inspector General of Police

Respondent

Director of Criminal Investigations

Respondent

Regional Police Commander, Dodoma

Respondent

The Officer Commander Incharge

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the supporting affidavit is defective for containing hearsay information

Ratio Decidendi

The affidavit in support of the application is incurably defective for containing hearsay information and lacking supplementary affidavits from persons mentioned; the defect renders the entire application incompetent.

Court Disposition

Application struck out

Orders

  • The application is struck out for being supported by a defective affidavit containing hearsay information.