Criminal Appeal No 239 of 2022 Patric Muruta v Republic

Criminal Appeal No 239 of 2022 Patric Muruta v Republic

The prosecution failed to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt due to material variance between the charge and evidence regarding dates and location, and failure to amend the charge as required by section 234 of the Criminal Procedure Act. This prejudiced the appellant and entitled him to acquittal.

Citation
Criminal Appeal No 239 of 2022 Patric Muruta v Republic
Parties
Appellant: Patrick Muruta; Respondent: The Republic
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Rape, Variance Between Charge and Evidence, Amendment of Charge, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Rape Variance Between Charge and Evidence Amendment of Charge Burden of Proof

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Muruta

Appellant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved the offence of rape beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether variance between the charge and evidence required amendment under section 234 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt due to material variance between the charge and evidence regarding dates and location, and failure to amend the charge as required by section 234 of the Criminal Procedure Act. This prejudiced the appellant and entitled him to acquittal.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • conviction quashed
  • sentence set aside