Mahahila MawashaKapama vs Repeblic DC Criminal Appeal No
Failure to record the accused's plea is a fatal irregularity that nullifies the proceedings, conviction, sentence, and all consequential orders.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- Mahahila MawashaKapama vs Repeblic DC Criminal Appeal No
- Parties
- Appellant: Maijahila Magwashi @ Lupama; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 1 January 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Plea Taking, Nullity of Proceedings, Conviction Quashed
- 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.
Parties
Maijahila Magwashi @ Lupama
Appellant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether failure to record the accused's plea renders the proceedings a nullity
Ratio Decidendi
Failure to record the accused's plea is a fatal irregularity that nullifies the proceedings, conviction, sentence, and all consequential orders.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- conviction quashed
- sentence set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT 01' TANZANIA AT MEEY/i. APP.TILL'YTF .JURISDICTION (Mbeya Registry) DC„ CRIMINAL APPE-'vL N0« 119 OF 200^ (Or’-ginal Criminal Case No<> 1^5 of 200^ of the District Court of Mbozi District at Vwawa) MAIJAHILA MAGWASHI @ LUPAMA Oo»oo« AFFELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC Tosoooo.goosoooooa*** RESPONDENT JUDGMENT MACKANJAc. Jo The appellant was convicted of stealing by agent c/s 273 (b) of the Penal Code<> He was aggrdeTT^i- henr.p 4° appeal© When this appeal was called for hearing on 11th April* 2005? I allowed it and reserved the reasons» The following are the reasons© When addressing the Court: Mr* Mwenda, learned State Attorney, observed that the procoa*di■no* before the trial court was a nullity because the trial proceed':without having taken the appellant*s plea« Now^ recording the pl^r. of a person who is charged with a criminal case is not discretionary on the part of the trial courto It is mandatory ar« it can be discerned in the wording of section 228 (1) of the Crimina" r'rc/~^dure AcN It provides thus: — <*228 (1) The substance of the charge shall be stated to the accused by -che court ^ and he shall be asked whether he admits or denies the truth of the charge0” In fact authorities are ambundant to the effect that what the accused person shall state in his plea shall be recorded as fully as possible*, Therefore*) as M r 5 Mwenda* learned State Attorney0 correctly made the point, the omission to call! upon the accused to plead to the charge was a fatal irregularity which nullified the proceedings, conviction and the sentence and all! or.O^rs that were made thereunder® It was by reason of the foregoing considerations that the appeal was allowed, consequent upon which the conviction was quashed; the sentence and the -erder for compensation were .set aside and the appellant was- sot Orders accordingly* Sgd. J. M* MACKANJA JUDGE 2VS/2005 Gertifi^d oS -JJae Hyriginal*