19841018 TZHC Mbeya5
- Citation
- 19841018 TZHC Mbeya5
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 18 October 1984
- Posture
- Criminal / Appeal
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 18 October 1984
- Posture
- Criminal / Appeal
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court held that the trial court's acquittal was justified as the prosecution failed to produce sufficient evidence and the powers of revision were exercised properly.
Court disposition
acquittal upheld
Orders
- Accused discharged and set free
02
Material facts
Parties
State
ProsecutorAccused
Defendant03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the order of acquittal was proper under Section 270 of the Penal Code
- 02
Whether the powers of revision were exercised judicially
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The prosecution argued that the trial court acquitted the accused without proper consideration of evidence and prematurely adjourned the hearing.
- Respondent
- The accused contended that the prosecution failed to produce sufficient evidence and that the acquittal was justified under Section 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Criminal Procedure Code
Powers of revision must be exercised judicially and not arbitrarily.
- 02
Penal Code, Section 270
Acquittal is proper when prosecution fails to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court held that the trial court's acquittal was justified as the prosecution failed to produce sufficient evidence and the powers of revision were exercised properly.
Obiter and limits
- The case was still fresh and an adjournment could have led to a more harmonious outcome.
- No need to cite other cases as the facts were clear.
Court disposition
acquittal upheld
- Accused discharged and set free
Source and reliance status
TZHC · 18 October 1984
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.
TZHC
Judgment· 18 October 1984
i10 5111f 00011 i[UR2:J TO ZdO1J IT I,020070JJ. Di DTICIT (ILiDY.. 1,rTL itol) 0j00 JOOL OJ 3 JL 00 26 OF 19 - ;4 o.J(OJTwr:00.I1i 0 0001 01.., 71 00 1 10 1 01 III Di i-DID. :1 10 -: 12 OIL JJJ. - 00 IIDDJO Lef : no I. 0 • Di 0 - :, icc-,. D -001n1 el i-ic trc00, D• o 00 0000000,0.000. 01I2. LL.JDD 00. 00001. DO O 0000,00000 C1IJG c11C P. Y C ) c 3.3 .270 aLCC1. 265 of tOo- 11-a: '1 BLHILTItJ. Thj is an oaor. 1 00- ode ino-;D:: .00 1O.iThJ.ie _?r.osccut-iar iDOifl.sO he order of acquittal of cia: in :1. c-oct ii: a a.- -s -. whore the.o001-en :- was charged with -the c:Ddcnco of Is 111 ..-'; 01Oc: aevants C. s 270 of tOo Penal 0 ode. The ones a -cO.:bc.iore thi. IDir: i:-.i. -:t 2 our o I loje Lis tnict and already two eo:cniion -:id;s. L----- :'- evidorco, a Ode ncljouied hearing on 21.2.04 the -dublIn 1 rosec00 n ac: -.J.w:nt ar.J Oslo is what transpired in court so roe::-: 0.1 1, L1ic inn I .-is O-ur I 0: waco::: the dora-i Oles-ic twice -Ic, the :,;:-:'osecn an to cone Do L rb Dub no f-01dsl to c-non, The nonaGon-a:: is the cci Olin wa -b in taae: cane I. nave nctnici to t to cis:oiso the0114r , Y ,cc:li acçuii the accused aca-': under 2, 190 c,D 11 a 'r:U:f.nc.l I -.oncndure Code, lit do so cr:ierod - And so the c.cardc: was .::on505ect and rho ::0000n' :ert itcOul an. and set free. The learnod that the póro-rs of ci . ral,:hrc,ic: cost b-s exn.-c00cI judicially bul that
in this case thc',r were coot. In, cenDa Don lion 0,11,0. we:t on to eloborate that the case nan still vary bosh a:: I -bloat an .djoi.rn. n-I. --:oul_d have been a monO aw:roonia. ho neil no. Plc nec al sub in rncly said - IOn t bOo 000:15_c Pros ed±on rio s 10 ral-.:o c.:.: -:onvjoac: .- ocaninba O-efrc tiil d:Jc-- in question. iLr,. fowl -c.. sine to ic, (-0000 1 :hhe osso o- f ,L- .0, v • laniin Nma 1977 L.R. 2, a. 90 1:: ca art cci his a-. anal: 0 - I do nO I 1:ocJ co . .......... C no -- - - -- coi :a 0-a-ca c-c -ny : - other case ion 00 - cl : at±c 1,500:1cc Oh lb ca:, Ocro that aliha- learned trial IDc:rd: hoot,: - i' 1:1, hoira Ia 00 row; bc Lia.ioe; Li once ./0 • 6 4 I 0 0 i1 2 737' D7 iIfIO flIL ijQ A.IGD Gif 6VOI.e: ; zopt:oc z' jo czc'ic :ç .nç oqncTor .Ioj ri jo oou a . Lrç ro )Jcçop ut?pfl :iö3 •3j7I: 't-qo.oj tw. ' vi:wi v • p1oI Tt ST IO(Ct JOtJOO. O 0530 eqq .ip.iO pu a a mpo 0 oaci pUurp ot. ;oi q -': :o:.i 30 i--Tnb 0 U pui OSTO 0Lfl JO {'COTUT1 3C) 3D1tO CU TJ r 5 T OS'OI a&oq-e et. IO1 op o. p .xocLtrLi IsT22r1 trç OS'J0 rtfl UsSfltsp Lrtn. oz uq :cnoC:"u 1o211 txt uc:.q eAOt 0U PIflO!k 0Jt pLCL0rpt' J. O$TO.IDXO UCL oxcv i[flOUiJ D0UOTT'CI OS op o pO1T 70.flOf003CT..3I.fl. JLC ..ILiCO o. ttoo oq. ao osoxci ei. iixojut O. GOt/4 tITo UTU tt)S 3.1 Tit1i IJT.I . S()UJ3 P3000.I eT.q Tk1Otflflf • .IO.flOOSOJj OTqrLJ Ot.z EI4 WL fl t) iXoti o. sit w:'rrcxnOclLY3 6.Ut)fltt o uo: ptq so ru fl4fl z:o.icT uonq ptr oit 'cr'o' •"q. nonq ur:L.InoCp3 .ro:c oqi oj stti qnc •cio.Sm .1oflOoo.1Ci OTlGflT :Lfl Lq snotjs O0)i :Ui. U0 jo iVp STIfl. IPtn 4C WY'(L )1' .1O.fl.OISQI,: Oqfl 't4 3tfl. SI0t{S p.I003.I .JTJ '1tOOL.C. UOT .1OETI) OTLI OTO.1-X) Ot[ 30 ET. 30 soOu.surrto.1TO u :ç orz c .1 nroo.: ILTiT.I jo e6 s/n
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.