said riziki kikoti versus republic 2023 tzhc 21195 22 september 2023

said riziki kikoti versus republic 2023 tzhc 21195 22 september 2023

The PF3 was improperly admitted as it was not read over to the appellant after admission and is expunged, but the remaining evidence, including the testimony of the victim and the medical expert, sufficiently proved penetration and the victim's age. The discrepancy in the date of birth was a minor error and did not affect the credibility of the witnesses. The omission of the time of the offence in the charge sheet did not cause injustice as other particulars were sufficient. The prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and the conviction is upheld.

Citation
said riziki kikoti versus republic 2023 tzhc 21195 22 september 2023
Parties
Appellant: Said Riziki Kikoti; Respondent: The Republic
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
22 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Statutory Rape, Evidence, Criminal Procedure, Credibility of Witnesses
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Rape Statutory Rape Evidence Criminal Procedure Credibility of Witnesses

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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Said Riziki Kikoti

Appellant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the admission of Exhibit Pl (PF3) was proper and whether its contents were properly communicated to the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution proved the case of statutory rape beyond reasonable doubt
  3. 3 Whether discrepancies in the age of the victim and other evidence affected the credibility of prosecution witnesses

Ratio Decidendi

The PF3 was improperly admitted as it was not read over to the appellant after admission and is expunged, but the remaining evidence, including the testimony of the victim and the medical expert, sufficiently proved penetration and the victim's age. The discrepancy in the date of birth was a minor error and did not affect the credibility of the witnesses. The omission of the time of the offence in the charge sheet did not cause injustice as other particulars were sufficient. The prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and the conviction is upheld.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • conviction and sentence of thirty years imprisonment upheld