Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TZHC

ally amon eliyakunda vs republic 2022 tzhc 11793 28 june 2022

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The bail conditions imposed by the Temeke District Court are fair and manageable, serving the purpose of ensuring the applicant's attendance at trial while upholding the right to bail. The application for relief from these conditions is misconceived and dismissed.

Court disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Bail conditions granted by the Temeke District Court are to be adhered to and are sustained.

02

Material facts

Parties

Ally Amon Eliyakunda

Applicant

Republic

Respondent Counsel: Ms. Imelda Mushi

Amounts and remedies

  • Bail Bond Per Surety: TZS 5,000,000
  • Number of Sureties Required: 2

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Relief From Bail Conditions

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Whether the bail conditions imposed by the Temeke District Court on the applicant charged with attempted murder are fair and should be relieved

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant prayed for relief from the bail conditions imposed by the Temeke District Court, arguing they should be modified.
Respondent
The respondent argued that the bail conditions are fair and manageable given the offence charged and prayed for the application to be dismissed.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    JAFFER v.R, (1972) H.C.D 92 B

    The primary purpose of remanding an accused person in custody is to ensure appearance at trial, not to punish.

  2. 02

    Criminal Procedure Act, 1985

    Section 148(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985 provides for bail in bailable offences subject to certain restrictions.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The bail conditions imposed by the Temeke District Court are fair and manageable, serving the purpose of ensuring the applicant's attendance at trial while upholding the right to bail. The application for relief from these conditions is misconceived and dismissed.

Obiter and limits

  • Remanding a man in custody necessarily involves curtailment of personal liberty and is generally undesirable except to ensure appearance at trial.
  • Courts are empowered to grant temporary release on bail to accused persons in bailable offences, subject to statutory restrictions.

Court disposition

Application dismissed

  • Bail conditions granted by the Temeke District Court are to be adhered to and are sustained.

Source and reliance status

TZHC · 28 June 2022

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· 28 June 2022

ally amon eliyakunda vs republic 2022 tzhc 11793 28 june 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (DAR ES SALAAM DISTRICT REGISTRY)

AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 34 OF 2022 (Originating from P.I No. 5 of2020 of District Court of Temeke) ALLY AMON ELIYAKUNDA ........................... APPLICANT

VERSUS REPUBLIC...... ............................................. ..RESPONDENT Date of last Order: 24/6/2022 Date ofRuling: 28/6/2022

RULING MGONYA, J. This is an Application for this court to grant relief to the bail conditions granted to the Applicant by the Temeke District Court. The same has been brought by the Applicant one ALLY AMON ELIYAKUNDA who is charged with an offence of Attempt Murder. The copy of the proceedings from Temeke District Court with the bail conditions thereto is attached to this application. Submitting for his Application, the Applicant prayed the court to grant relief to the bail conditions by the Temeke District court. The said conditions are as hereunder: - i 1. Two (2) reliable sureties one of the sureties being the Government employee.

2. Sureties to produce introduction letters from Government Authorities and IDS.

3. Each surety to sign bail bond of Tshs 5,000,000/-. Responding to the Applicants prayer, Ms. Imelda Mushi who was representing the Republic, the Respondent herein was on the view that, the conditions offered to the Applicant are fair and manageable according to the offence he is charged. From that observation, the leaned State Attorney prayed the Application be denied and dismissed. Before I determine this Application, I have to declare that, the primary purpose of remanding an accused person in custody is not to punish him (for courts may only punish a person found guilty of an offence) but to ensure that he will appear to take his trial and not seek to evade justice by leaving the jurisdiction of the court. One may refer the case of JAFFER v.R, (1972) H.C.D 92 B. Remanding a man in custody necessarily involves the curtailment of his personal liberty. In a majority of cases, such a course is considered to be undesirable, and so courts are empowered, not to set accused persons free, but to give them temporary release from custody while at the same time ensuring 2 that the accused person in question will appear to take his trial on the date to be fixed by the Court. Subject to certain statutory restrictions, all offences, other than murder or treason, are generally bailable. But some of the statutory restrictions are such that they appear to create other categories of

non-bailable offences. For bailable offences, section 148(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985 provides that where a person appears or is brought before a court, and such person is prepared before that court to give bail, the court may, subject to certain restrictions, admit that person to bail or release him on his executing a bond with or without sureties for his appearance at his trial or resumption of the trial at a given time and place. Having said so, it is from the record and particularly from the Application at hand, it came to my knowledge that the Applicants offence is Attempt Murder of which is bailable hence the above bail conditions. I had an opportunity of going through the bail conditions granted to the Applicant as seen above. It is my firm observation that the said conditions one not only fair, but manageable. This is so as to adhere to the meaning of bail and its purpose. 3 The conditions offered are sufficient since the court needs to have an assurance of the accused's who is the Applicant herein to his attendance when this case is called; while enjoying his constitutional right of right to bail. Having said so, I proceed to dismiss this application for being misconceived. Bail condition granted to the Applicant by the Temeke District court are to be adhered to and they are accordingly sustained. It is so ordered. L.E. MGONYA

JUDGE 28/6/2022 Court: Ruling delivered in my chambers in the presence of the Applicant, Ms. Imelda Mushi State Attorney for the Respondent and Ms. Veronica RMA, this 28th day of June, 2022. /Z v’ 1/ 6 X' L. E. MGONYA

JUDGE 28/6/2022 4

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.

JAFFER v.R, (1972) H.C.D 92 B

Case cited

Criminal Procedure Act, 1985

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.