haruni msumari another vs republic 2018 tzhcced 12 12 april 2018

The applicants are entitled to bail as the offences are bailable, there is no objection from the respondent, and the court has jurisdiction under the relevant provisions of the EOCCA.

Citation: haruni msumari another vs republic 2018 tzhcced 12 12 april 2018
Parties: Applicant: Haruni Msumari; Applicant: Msafiri Mazengo; Respondent: The Republic
Court: TANZLII
Jurisdiction: Tanzania
Judgment Date: 12 April 2018
Procedural Posture: Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
Outcome: bail granted
Legal Topics: Bail, Unlawful Possession of Government Trophies, Jurisdiction, Surety Requirements
Source Language: English

Criminal Law Economic Crimes Bail Unlawful Possession of Government Trophies Jurisdiction Surety Requirements

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

Haruni Msumari

Applicant

Msafiri Mazengo

Applicant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicants are entitled to bail pending trial for economic offences involving property valued above ten million shillings
2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant bail in this matter

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants are entitled to bail as the offences are bailable, there is no objection from the respondent, and the court has jurisdiction under the relevant provisions of the EOCCA.

Court Disposition

bail granted

Orders

Each applicant to deposit cash Tshs. 3,928,750 or immovable property of equal value.
Each applicant to provide two sureties, each surety to execute a bond of Tshs. 1,000,000; sureties must be Dodoma residents and one must be a government employee.