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 trial court erred by convicting the appellant as charged without substituting the charge for the lesser offence proved, but the omission is curable as no failure of justice occurred; evidence supported conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm, not grievous harm.
Source excerpt
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant trafficked 147.5 Kgs of cannabis sativa; the charge was sufficiently particularized, the chain of custody was intact, contradictions in evidence were minor and explained, and the cautioned statement was valid and voluntary.
Source excerpt
The conviction was quashed because the prosecution's evidence was materially inconsistent and contradictory, the chain of custody for the narcotic drugs was broken with unexplained missing bundles, the search and seizure were conducted unlawfully without a warrant as required by law, and the caution statement was irregularly obtained and inadmissible. These defects went to the root of the case and the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The appellant was caught red-handed in possession of government trophy, corroborated by multiple prosecution witnesses and documentary evidence. Minor contradictions in time were immaterial. Visual identification concerns were irrelevant as the arrest occurred at the crime scene. The caution statement was properly admitted after inquiry. The absence of a local leader did not affect the legality of the search and seizure. The defence did not cast doubt on the prosecution case. The conviction and sentence were upheld.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal after finding contradictions in the prosecution evidence and quashed the conviction and 20-year sentence.
The appellants were caught red-handed in possession of government trophies in a buy-bust operation, and the chain of custody was properly maintained. Minor discrepancies in labelling and container description did not prejudice the appellants or undermine the prosecution's case. The prosecution was not required to call all witnesses or produce all documents listed at committal. The defence evidence did not raise reasonable doubt. The conviction and sentence were upheld.
Source excerpt
The Court found that the discrepancies in the prosecution evidence were trivial and did not undermine the prosecution case, the chain of custody of the narcotic drugs was properly established, the burden of proof was not shifted to the appellants, the written statement was properly admitted as there was no objection, the trial judge gave adequate reasons for differing from assessors, and the value of the narcotic drugs assessed for bail was properly used for sentencing. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed a criminal application for review, holding that the applicant’s complaints sought re-assessment of evidence, which is not a ground for review under Rule 66(1).
The appellant failed to substantiate lawful allocation and ownership of the disputed land due to contradictions in her evidence, lack of proper documentary proof, and discrepancies between her testimony and that of her witnesses. The trial tribunal did not err in its evaluation of evidence or procedure at the locus in quo. There is no justification to reverse the trial tribunal's decision.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld a rape conviction, holding that the victim’s age was sufficiently proved by witness evidence and alleged inconsistencies were immaterial.
Explore more
