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
There is no sufficient evidence directly implicating the accused in causing the death of the deceased; the prosecution's case relies on generalizations, hearsay, and an inadmissible co-accused confession without corroboration. Therefore, no prima facie case is established against the accused to require him to enter his defence.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to adduce sufficient evidence linking the accused to the commission of murder, lacking direct evidence, crucial documentary evidence, and reliable circumstantial evidence. The evidence presented was insufficient to require the accused to defend himself, and the burden of proof was not discharged beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed the Republic’s criminal appeal after the appellant failed to file written submissions, treating the omission as want of prosecution.
The trial magistrate erred by acquitting the second respondent without analyzing the evidence or providing reasons, contrary to legal requirements. The evidence on record connected both accused, and both had a case to answer. The acquittal was set aside and both accused were ordered to enter their defence.
Source excerpt
The High Court erred in law in holding that forgery and uttering false documents could not be charged together, as they are distinct offences. The evidence against the 1st respondent was insufficient to require a defence, but there was sufficient evidence against the 2nd respondent to require him to make a defence. The test for a prima facie case is whether the prosecution evidence, unless shaken, is sufficient to convict, not merely whether there is some evidence.
Source excerpt
The High Court of Tanzania found no case to answer in a murder prosecution, holding the evidence insufficient and ordering the accused acquitted and released.
The prosecution evidence was fundamentally contradictory, unreliable, and discredited, with confessions obtained by torture and procedural irregularities in recording statements. No reasonable tribunal could convict on such evidence; therefore, the accused have no case to answer.
Source excerpt
The High Court refused revision of a magistrate’s ruling that there was a case to answer, holding that such an interlocutory decision was not revisable at that stage.
The evidence presented by the prosecution was contradictory and insufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused; therefore, the accused cannot be called upon to defend mere suspicions.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that the prosecution had not made out a prima facie case against either accused and entered findings of not guilty under section 293(1).
Explore more
