Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TANZLII

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO 41 01 OF 2024 GODFREY JOHN GUGAI 3 OTHERS VS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The application for stay of execution was granted because all procedural requirements were met and the respondent did not contest the application.

Court disposition

application granted

Orders

  • Execution of the distress warrant is suspended pending hearing and determination of the intended appeal.

02

Material facts

Parties

Godfrey John Gugai

Applicant Counsel: Nehemiah Nkoko

George Makaranga

Applicant Counsel: Nehemiah Nkoko

Leonard Mabai Aloys

Applicant Counsel: Nehemiah Nkoko

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent Counsel: Nassoro J. Katuga

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Application / Application for Stay of Distress Warrant Pending Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Whether the applicants are entitled to a stay of execution of the distress warrant pending appeal

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicants sought a stay of execution of the distress warrant pending the determination of their intended appeal, having lodged a notice of appeal and fulfilling all procedural requirements.
Respondent
The respondent did not contest the application, acknowledging that all requirements for the stay had been fulfilled.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Rule 11(2) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009

    A stay of execution may be granted where the requirements under the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Court of Appeal Rules are fulfilled and the application is uncontested.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The application for stay of execution was granted because all procedural requirements were met and the respondent did not contest the application.

Court disposition

application granted

  • Execution of the distress warrant is suspended pending hearing and determination of the intended appeal.

Source and reliance status

TANZLII · 1 January 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· 1 January 2024

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO 41 01 OF 2024 GODFREY JOHN GUGAI 3 OTHERS VS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA

AT PAR ES SALAAM CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 41/01 OF 2024 GODFREY JOHN GUGAI..............................................................1st APPLICANT GEORGE MAKARANGA......... ......... ................. .............. ...........2nd APPLICANT LEONARD MABAI ALOYS........................................................... 3rd APPLICANT

VERSUS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS...................... ............. RESPONDENT (Application for Stay of Distress Warrant Originating from the Judgment of the High Court at Dar es Salaam) f Pomo. J.^ dated the 28th June, 2024 in Criminal Appeal No. 101 of 2022

RULING 15ltl July, 2024 FIKIRINI. J.A.: Godfrey John Gugai, George Makaranga and Leonard Mabai Aloys, all to be referred as the 1st, 2nd and 3rd applicants and another person not part of the present application, were charged before the Kisutu Resident Magistrates' Court in Criminal Case No. 382 of 2017. They were acquitted on 12th November, 2021 after a stretched prosecution which took almost four (4) years. The respondent, aggrieved by the trial court decision preferred an appeal to the High Court in Criminal appeal No. 101 of 2022. The High i nullified the proceedings of the trial court as a result of which it ordered re-trial of Criminal Case No. 382 of 2017. Dissatisfied with the decision the applicants preferred an appeal to the Court. A notice of appeal in that regard was lodged on 1st July, 2024 as indicated vide annexture - 5. Meanwhile, the respondent on the 2nd July, 2024 served the applicants' Counsel with summons commanding the applicants to appear before the Resident Magistrates Court of Dar es Salaam at Kisutu. Consequent to that the applicants promptly lodged the present application by way of notice of motion in terms of sections 3A, 3B (1) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Cap. 141 R.E. 2019 and rules 4 (1), 4 (2) (a) - (c), 11 (2), 11 (6) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 (the Rules), supported by the applicants joint affidavit. The respondent did

not file affidavit in reply contesting the application. During the hearing, Mr. Nehemiah Nkoko learned Counsel appeared for all the applicants and Mr. Nassoro J. Katuga, learned Senior State Attorney appeared for the respondent. Mr. Katuga informed me that the application is not contested considering that all the requirements had been fulfilled. Mr. Nkoko welcomed the consideration, and urged me to grant the application. I have examined the application and the joint affidavit deponed and find no reason to decline the uncontested application. I thus proceed to grant the application pursuant to rule 11 (2) of the Rules and suspend the execution of the distress warrant issued pending hearing and determination of the intended appeal. It is so ordered. DATED at DAR ES SALAAM this 15th day of July, 2024. P. S. FIKIRINI

JUSTICE OF APPEAL The Ruling delivered this 15th day of July, 2024 in the presence of the Mr. Nehemiah Nkoko, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Nassoro J. Katuga, learned Senior State Attorney for the respondent, is hereby certified as a true copy of the original.

0. H. KINGWELE

DEPUTY REGISTRAR

COURT OF APPEAL 3

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.

Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Cap. 141 R.E. 2019

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009

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.