19720624 TZHC Dodoma

19720624 TZHC Dodoma

Section 49(2) of Cap. 302 places the burden of proof on the accused to show lawful possession of government trophy; the trial magistrate erred by not applying this statutory provision, and the evidence established unlawful possession by the first, second, and third respondents.

Citation
19720624 TZHC Dodoma
Parties
Appellant: Director of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: First Respondent; Respondent: Second Respondent; Respondent: Third Respondent; Respondent: Fourth Respondent
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
24 June 1972
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; convictions ordered for first, second, and third respondents; acquittal of fourth respondent upheld.
Legal Topics
Burden of Proof, Unlawful Possession, Government Trophy, Fauna Conservation, Expert Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Wildlife Law Burden of Proof Unlawful Possession Government Trophy Fauna Conservation Expert Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Appellant

First Respondent

Respondent

Second Respondent

Respondent

Third Respondent

Respondent

Fourth Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial magistrate misdirected himself on the burden of proof under section 49(2) of Cap. 302
  2. 2 Whether the trial magistrate erred in assessing common intention and credibility of prosecution witnesses
  3. 3 Whether the acquittal of respondents for unlawful possession of government trophy was justified

Ratio Decidendi

Section 49(2) of Cap. 302 places the burden of proof on the accused to show lawful possession of government trophy; the trial magistrate erred by not applying this statutory provision, and the evidence established unlawful possession by the first, second, and third respondents.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; convictions ordered for first, second, and third respondents; acquittal of fourth respondent upheld.

Orders

  • Record sent back to trial court to convict and sentence first, second, and third respondents for unlawful possession of government trophy as charged in counts 3,5,7,9 and 11.
  • Appeal against fourth respondent dismissed.