19960425 TZHC Dar es Salaam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM. MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL CAUSE NO. 2J/96 VERSUS BUBESHI 1 J. ! This i$ an application for bail under Section 148 (3) of CPAct 1985 that the applicant be released on bail pe~ding the hearing of the char~~s .. filed against him. The app~icant, a citizen Guinea Bisao...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19960425 TZHC Dar es Salaam
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 25 April 1996
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
No structured case brief is available yet for this judgment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM. MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL CAUSE NO. 2J/96 VERSUS BUBESHI 1 J. ! This i$ an application for bail under Section 148 (3) of CPAct 1985 that the applicant be released on bail pe~ding the hearing of the char~~s .. filed against him. The app~icant, a citizen Guinea Bisao resides in Mombasa Kenya with his family where he is employed as a Marine engineer. He is. facing charge preferred nri.d&t' ~an-22.6 :Jr the Penal Code, the particulars . being- that ti>getber . with others not in court, on 31/1/96, at- Dar es .Salaam Port..,. withi~ the District of Ilala, urilawfully and with intent to injure the workers on board vessel MV SEAIAND', did plant two Marine Mines on board the said. ~ss.e.l..,. ' " I When the applicant appeared before the lower Court at Kisutu Mr. Mkondya learned eounsel applied to have the applicant released on bail. The prosecutor / objected to tha application on three grounds namely that the applicant was a foreigner, the offenee if eonvicted altracts custodial sentence of fourteen years, if ccl!~-icted and thirdly there are two other persons still at large and the proseoutJY fee,rod that the applicant might abscond, Yir. Mkondya thought otherwise - he informed the ccurt that the applicant is married to his niece and undertook to see to it that he complies to bail conditions. ,. ' Mr. Mkondya was convinced that his client'was innocent. Mre. Kimaro, PRM in her ruling rejected the application basically because the applicant was a for~igner with no fixed abode in Tanzania. ¥.ios Murtissi, learned State Attorney appearing for the Republic opled to leave -the matter in courts'hands as she said she had not seen the record of the lower court. She sa~d however that the offence is b~ilable. There are known general ·considerations in applications for bail pending trial. Essentially this is a Ju~icial. discretion on the part of magistrate or Judge, though it mu 3t be exercised Judiciot1sly. Amongst the considerations ruid perhaps relevant t > . this application are whether the applicant is likely -2- to abscond; how serious is the offence and applicants residence or domicile. The can be no·doubt that the offence. with which the accused is charged is a serious one. Mr. Mkondya for the applicant thought ,otherwise. Equally it is not at all in dispute that the applic~nt is a stranger to this country. He is a native of Guinea Bissao reseding; in Kenya. In these circumstances, it would be unsafe in my view and indeed most unrealistic to grant bail pending the comrilital proceedings to this court. Granting of the application ~iould be detrimental to the in~erests of justice. I dec:ine/l?ant the ~pplication~ ~~/ j! ) , . J I ., __,t.l )i, .t,J.. J., .v Deliv.ered: A.G. Bubeshi .Mr. Mkondya for Applicant JUDGE Miss Munissi for Republic. 25/4/96