Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Juma Masanja stabbed the deceased with a knife, causing septic shock and death, with malice aforethought, and the accused's defence was a general denial unsupported by evidence.
Source excerpt
The conviction for murder was unsafe due to inadmissible written dying declaration and spousal evidence, and lack of clear proof of malice aforethought; however, oral dying declarations and medical evidence established that the appellant caused the deceased's death, warranting a conviction for manslaughter instead of murder.
Source excerpt
The appellant's voluntary extra judicial confession, properly recorded in substantial compliance with Chief Justice's Guidelines, provided sufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; dying declaration was unreliable and not relied upon; conviction and sentence were proper.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case due to contradictions, lack of credible corroboration, and insufficient evidence; suspicion alone cannot ground conviction.
Source excerpt
Prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused murdered the deceased. Identification evidence was unreliable, the dying declaration named another person, and prosecution failed to call key witnesses. Suspicion and circumstantial evidence were insufficient for conviction.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania nullified a murder trial for failure to properly sum up vital points of law to assessors and ordered the appellant released.
The High Court of Tanzania acquitted Salum Ibrahim Miheva of murder, finding the prosecution failed to prove identity and causation beyond reasonable doubt.
The trial was vitiated by the trial judge's failure to properly address and sum up to assessors on their roles, responsibilities, and vital points of law and evidence, rendering the proceedings null and void. The appropriate remedy is to order a retrial.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to prove the offence of murder against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt due to unreliable identification in a chaotic mob, contradictions in prosecution evidence, and the exclusion of the dying declaration which did not implicate the appellants. The benefit of doubt must operate in favour of the appellants.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal found irregular summing up to assessors and non-direction on vital legal points, quashed the conviction, and ordered a retrial.
Explore more
