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
Neglect to prevent an offence is not a cognate minor offence to cattle theft; conviction and sentence for an offence not charged, without affording appellants an opportunity to defend, resulted in failure of justice and unfair trial.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania partly allowed a criminal appeal, expunged a wrongly tendered exhibit, and substituted armed robbery with assault after finding theft was not proved.
The evidence did not prove penetration, an essential element of rape, but established indecent assault; thus, the conviction for rape was quashed and substituted with indecent assault.
Source excerpt
The High Court substituted a conviction for theft under section 265 of the Penal Code, reduced the sentence from six to four years, and ordered compensation.
The evidence did not establish robbery with violence as the violence was not shown to be for the purpose of obtaining or retaining stolen property, and there was reasonable doubt as to who stole the money. The facts proved only support a conviction for assault causing actual bodily harm against the first appellant. The second appellant's conviction and sentence are quashed and set aside.
Source excerpt
The evidence did not establish that violence was used with intent to obtain or retain stolen property, thus not constituting robbery with violence. However, the facts proved that the first appellant assaulted the victim causing actual bodily harm, justifying substitution of conviction to assault occasioning actual bodily harm under section 241 of the Penal Code. The second appellant was not proved to have participated and is acquitted.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that where evidence proved theft rather than obtaining by false pretences, a conviction for theft could be substituted under section 187(2).
The Court of Appeal allowed the prosecution’s appeal, substituting convictions for theft under section 187(2) where the evidence showed theft rather than obtaining by false pretences.
The appellant’s conviction for possession of house-breaking instruments was upheld, while the store-breaking and stealing counts were substituted with section 296(1).
The High Court held that a district court could not, in revision, substitute convictions and prison terms for acquittals. The appeals were allowed and the convictions quashed.
Explore more
