19931115 TZCA Arusha

19931115 TZCA Arusha

The trial magistrate misapplied the provisions of sections 226 and 227 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985 by proceeding to convict and sentence the appellants in absentia before the close of the prosecution case, thereby denying them the right to be heard in their defence. The proceedings must be remitted to the trial court for compliance with section 226(2).

Citation
19931115 TZCA Arusha
Parties
Appellant: Oloniyo Lemuna; Appellant: Leittoni Lemuna; Respondent: The Republic
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
15 November 1993
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal to the Court of Appeal From the High Court, Which Heard an Appeal From the District Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed to the extent explained; proceedings remitted to the trial court for compliance with section 226(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985.
Legal Topics
Robbery With Violence, Conviction and Sentencing in Absentia, Application of Criminal Procedure Act Sections 226 and 227, Right to Be Heard
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Robbery With Violence Conviction and Sentencing in Absentia Application of Criminal Procedure Act Sections 226 and 227 Right to Be Heard

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oloniyo Lemuna

Appellant

Leittoni Lemuna

Appellant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal to the Court of Appeal From the High Court, Which Heard an Appeal From the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants were lawfully convicted and sentenced in absentia under the correct provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985
  2. 2 Whether the trial court misapplied sections 226 and 227 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985
  3. 3 Whether the appellants were denied the right to be heard in their defence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial magistrate misapplied the provisions of sections 226 and 227 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985 by proceeding to convict and sentence the appellants in absentia before the close of the prosecution case, thereby denying them the right to be heard in their defence. The proceedings must be remitted to the trial court for compliance with section 226(2).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed to the extent explained; proceedings remitted to the trial court for compliance with section 226(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985.

Orders

  • Proceedings remitted to the trial court to deal with the matter in compliance with section 226(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985.