Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TZCA

19880728 TZCA Dar es Salaam5

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The identification of the appellant by PW1 was sufficiently reliable and supported by concurrent findings of fact by both lower courts; no exceptional circumstances exist to warrant interference.

Court disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • conviction upheld

02

Material facts

Parties

Appellant

Appellant

The Republic

Respondent Counsel: State Attorney

Amounts and remedies

  • Amount Stolen: KES 600,000

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Appellant protested innocence and challenged the reliability and corroboration of identification evidence by PW1.
Respondent
State Attorney argued identification evidence was believed by both lower courts, corroboration not necessary in every case, and no point of law arises in second appeal.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Criminal Appeal No. 120 of 1976, EACA 469

    Appellate court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless exceptional circumstances exist.

  2. 02

    Criminal Appeal No. 82 of 1973

    Identification evidence need not be corroborated in every case if believed by trial courts.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The identification of the appellant by PW1 was sufficiently reliable and supported by concurrent findings of fact by both lower courts; no exceptional circumstances exist to warrant interference.

Court disposition

appeal dismissed

  • conviction upheld

Source and reliance status

TZCA · 28 July 1988

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

TZCA

Judgment· 28 July 1988

19880728 TZCA Dar es Salaam5

IFi r_r.._:,:; COD1tT OF •APP2AL OF To'..liZJ!.:Fi:W:·~ «I' • !:1'.Jr'TiilJZA J. A,,.i,_ KIJ.:.i'JGA 2 J. ,l. 9 l,.nd OE/2 2 J .. .t...) 1-li~I.IBUllh 0 o O O O O lb -0 o • !..PPELL/:J:JIJ.1 VoI'SUS T.:IB :~: :,FO::)LIC ~ • • • • • • • • • • • • PJJSPONDJ3::NT (A::_)poc.l fx•om tho decision of tho T[i[;'h Court of Tc,;1.:,_:,nj.,3, 2.t Lu211z2..)(Kc.titi 5 J.) ddod t:10 27th d2,y of October, 1987 in C,•irninc:,l Appc:::,1 l~ o.. 217 of 1986 to SUl):,?Ort tho t:C'i;_J_ com:-t I s docisiono Tho j;>J:csont 2,:p:p0llc..nts 1 Du.ring tho 11:i.(;'ht of 29th Sopto;a1)cr 1986 2, 33:·oup of bc-,.ndits cxc:ciod households )1:-:~d ovo1~ 8}.·"s~ 600,000 /= ci::sh ;,..nd c, 1:-:rgo 2.ssortmont of i trn,:s of p1•oporty stolon 2,t c;1:11 ::_)oint c..nd one of t::.c victims w::1s bo2-t011 up. The o,ppoll2.11t n.::.s iclo::.Yt ifiod by P. W. 1 r.rfffZI,:t:.. ~•i.:.2:.ilJ!_, tho first '.Vi.otim in terms of scquonco: ::-,;.1d. t:~01·0 wc,s ovidonco by n number of pooplo thn.t 0 Cl O O Cl O if' /2. 2 rotor tto tricl. Pq:-r.1 told the 001..1:1:t of tri.::,.l t:-,_c,t tho n.};Jpollr.nt v., •";·!, ' .,_/ 1{:'- 2,1)0U u.LJ,1c:co.-.::;t -·• · r:11•1 o n :LI'OL1 1• 11s llor:1cstoc..d .. P. :-r c 1 .s:·,id thc,t the e..::?:i?CJJ.r.nt T~10 c..1.):;;>ollG.Ylt continued to protest his ilmoconco before us. rio dso coraplc,inocl tlic,t P ,,-;-Jo 1 1 s evidence about t;10 idonti:fic£1tion of

tho c,ppell;:,,,'1t on c.. d2..:-ck ;1i0 J.·. t w::·,s not corrohorc.tod by n.ny ott.e1' 1-ri tDosso In opposinc tt.e c.::?poc.l tl10 102.rncd Stdo Attorney submi ttod t}1i"..t, O.iX'-I't f~c'om t;10 f,,ct t',.r. t tho evidence· of idontific2,tion wc,s 1)olicved b;y ~..,oth courts 1,elow, ::-,nd t:.:o fm-ther feet t~~-c-~t sv.ch ovidonco cloos not nocosso.rily h;:,vo to 1Jo co:ci·obo:ro.,ted in cv0r-3r cc>so, the}.'G is no :point · of la.w,. C[;;iWo.,sscd in t::·2:i.s second 2,ppcc:'.L iC.cntified by P. ~T .1 only. -;:Iouevor one ,.1ns to tclco into a,cco1.mt t:1roc mnttcrsg 2.cco:cd:i.ng to P.W·.1 11 tho ni{silt looked lilw c., d2.y11 , end according- to P.,H.4 Second, tho <-,ppel1r..nt wc,.s F., ~i.1 1 s neighbom'..'., Third_, unlil(c t:·o otl1or would-be idontif;yinc; witnesses, P.H;1 WC$ with tho robbers fo:•: quite .:-, frllilo~ i;iovin0 f~~or,1 0110 house to 2,;1.otho1• on tli.oh· orders, e,.1d. t].:,.is 1)ofo:ro one of the c:3Jl3·sters st2J'.'tod shooting, thus scc..tto:;:-ing· tcJ:::or .i.;.1 the villc-.gc, which would h:wo mr,.dc it not so likoly fo1· tho other vict;i_r,1s, subdued by frig~1t, -to cc,:co to mako 2, cc:2•eful ,,- 3 We 118..VO h:-.:,cl n 02.:i..~oful look c.t tho roco::..~d c,nd considered -t:ie s1.1.iJmissions., In t:.:.iG it i:3 cori,cct t: ct b.o j_dontificc,tion t;1c findin.; t:1n,t t'.,.o iclontific;·.tion wr-,s m,i.i'?iciontly :rolic..'olc

(s00 ~':.PF.il:~ NO. 82 OF 1973). t:w Li[;h Covxt oo:,:~.:octl;; di:i:'ockd t>or.1selvc::; on this 0,,s:poct c,nd :roa,c}:..cd 11 concurrc!lt finding. 1fo n.rc v.nr:.1Jlo to f::,.,.:l t t:1orn. Then tho:"i:'C is tl,.o concomi twt dimension m,,;·od lJy t~1G lo::u"l.10d St~:to Lttorncy 2nd th;::-,t is, in c:-:ny event, tJ.,is i.s c, second c,ppoal e:,.11d tl;,G point ct issue cxisos onl~,- fror,1 a, concv..:r~l'ont findini:;; of fc,cts .. would not into:rfc,:o nit:,. concv.rrcnt findin{,'s of fo,cts 1)3" tllo cou:rts / 1956 23 EACA 469)0 cj_:::_,cun.st2,ncos wG 02.-11 into::.'fo~c'O w:;.th sucl1 oo:.1cl,,.:;_'::·ont findings of f;_:otz ( sco II'JlfilY OKlH,O v R, :Jc.st !i.f}:ic.2J.1 Court of L:ppocl Crimind 120 of 1976) t Ho such VO;.'j' oxcoptiom,1 cil'cumsk.nccs exist in tho J?I'Osent ['..'_ppce,,1 wd tho conviction of tho n:ppollmt c2,lli1ot be cssc,ilcd,. Tho e;ppocl is clisr.~issod in its ontj_rcty. (L ,,_. "11" l-'.Lo l'" -•L:-iJ.')...i:- =) •.TT fJ '-.U..:J JUSTICE OF .lPP:;Jlu., ( R, H. KIS.tJKI,1) JUSTIC':tf; OF .:&Pi:'.l,;L {A~ M.. A,, Ollli2) JUSTIC:J OF J:..PPllLL I certify t!.1d this is c., true 09.py ?f t'.10 oi•igincl., /~,-- (s,. 1V.:' KLJI) _DJ?T_,n:c\'. _ ~:.·~·.:;"] I~~'F.:./._~--

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 Appeal No. 82 of 1973

Case cited

Criminal Appeal No. 120 of 1976

Case cited

EACA 469

Case cited

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.