Rajabu Mubaraka Mgala v Republic
The appeal was filed outside the statutory forty-five day period, warranting its striking out.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- Rajabu Mubaraka Mgala v Republic
- Parties
- Appellant: Rajabu Mubaraka Mgala; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 30 May 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Economic Appeal / Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- appeal struck out
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Time Limitation, Extension of Time
- 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
Rajabu Mubaraka Mgala
Appellant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Economic Appeal / Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal was filed within the prescribed time
- 2 Whether the appellant is entitled to extension of time
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was filed outside the statutory forty-five day period, warranting its striking out.
Court Disposition
appeal struck out
Orders
- The appeal is struck out.
- The appellant may apply for extension of time to appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE SUB-REGISTRY OF MANYARA AT BABATI ECONOMIC APPEAL NO. 23357 OF 2024 (Originating from Economic Case No. 23 of2023 of District Court ofSimanjiro at Orkesumet) RAJABU MUBARAKA MGALA......................................................... APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC................................................................................RESPONDENT RULING October 2024 MIRINDO, J.: At the commencement of the hearing of the appeal, the learned State Attorney, Mr. Johnson Ndibalema, raised a point of law that the appeal has been filed beyond the prescribed time. The records of Simanjiro District Court indicate that the appellant received copies of proceedings and judgment on 30 May 2024 but his appeal was lodged on 19 August 2024. The appellant pleaded that he should be granted extension of time to appeal given that his notice of intention to appeal was timeous. According to section 361 (1) (b) of the Criminal Procedure Act [Cap 20 RE 2022] the appeal should have been lodged within forty-five days from the date of the receipt of those documents. It is apparent on the face of the record that the appeal has been lodged beyond the stipulated time and it is hereby struck out. The appellant is at liberty to apply for extension of time to appeal. JUDGE 9/10/2024