Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TANZLII

Adamu Isaya v R

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Apparent illegalities relating to the plea of guilty justify granting extension of time to appeal.

Court disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Applicant granted extension of time to lodge an appeal to the High Court within 45 days from the date of the ruling

02

Material facts

Parties

Adamu Isaya

Applicant Counsel: Filemon Maige

The Republic

Respondent Counsel: Raphael Rwezahula

Amounts and remedies

  • Extension Period Granted: 45

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Applicant's counsel pointed out different illegalities relating to the charge and the plea of guilty and requested extension of time to appeal.
Respondent
Respondent's counsel had no objection to the application for extension of time and argued there was no formal application for bail.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Section 392A of the Criminal Procedure Act [Cap. R.E 2022]

    Extension of time may be granted where apparent illegalities exist in the proceedings.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Apparent illegalities relating to the plea of guilty justify granting extension of time to appeal.

Obiter and limits

  • There was no formal application for bail before the Court.

Court disposition

Application granted

  • Applicant granted extension of time to lodge an appeal to the High Court within 45 days from the date of the ruling

Source and reliance status

TANZLII · 13 December 2024

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

TANZLII

Judgment· 13 December 2024

Adamu Isaya v R

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE SUB-REGISTRY OF MANYARA

AT BABATI MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 29872 OF 2024 (Arising from Criminal Case No. 14217 of 2024 of the District Court of Hanang’ at Katesh.) ADAMU ISAYA ........................................................................APPLICANT

VERSUS THE REPUBLIC ...................................................................RESPONDENT

RULING 11th and 13th December 2024 MIRINDO, J.: Adamu Isaya was convicted on his own plea of guilty by Hanang’ District Court and duly issued his notice of intention to appeal to the High Court at Babati but delayed in lodging a petition of appeal. He is now applying for extension of time to appeal to this Court. He was represented by Mr. Filemon Maige, learned Advocate. Mr. Raphael Rwezahula, learned State Attorney represented the respondent Republic. The applicant’s counsel filed a letter to this Court asking for bail pending extension of time. At the hearing of the application for extension of time, Mr Maige fumbled on the legal status of the letter in view of the provisions of section 392A of the Criminal Procedure Act [Cap. R.E 2022]. Mr. Rwezahula argued that there was no application for bail before this Court. It is my view that there is no formal application for bail consideration. 1 As to the application for extension of time, Mr. Rwezahula, learned State Attorney, had no objection. Mr. Maige, learned Advocate pointed out different illegalities relating to the charge and the plea of guilty. Having examined the proceedings of Hanang’ District Court, I am satisfied that there are apparent illegalities relating to the plea of guilty. Accordingly, the applicant, Adamu Isaya, is granted extension of time to lodge an appeal to the High Court within 45 days from the date of this ruling. DATED at BABATI this 13th day of December, 2024 F.M. MIRINDO

JUDGE COURT: Ruling delivered in chambers this 13th day of December, 2024 in the presence of the applicant in person and in the presence of Advocate Ms. Fides Mwenda holding brief for the applicant’s counsel, Mr. Filemon Maige and in the presence of Ms. Rose Kayumbo, State Attorney for the respondent Republic. B/C: Ms. Anna Mathayo (RMA) present. COURT: Right of appeal explained. F.M. MIRINDO

JUDGE 2

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.

Criminal Procedure Act [Cap. R.E 2022]

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.