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 appeal was dismissed because the conviction was based on a voluntary confession corroborated by other evidence, all material witnesses were called, and the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The trial magistrate properly evaluated the evidence and considered the defence.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt due to material contradictions in the evidence regarding the ownership and description of the stolen property, and failure to call material witnesses, warranting adverse inference. Additionally, the trial court's failure to specify convictions for each accused rendered the convictions and sentences a nullity.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal against a corruption conviction, finding the prosecution’s evidence contradictory and its proof of guilt inadequate.
The conviction was quashed because the variance between the charge sheet and prosecution evidence regarding the dates of the offence was material and unamended, rendering the charge unproven beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The respondent's Certificate of Title is valid and unchallenged, proving ownership; the appellant failed to prove irregularity or denial of right to be heard, and did not properly apply to call witnesses or an expert; thus, the appeal lacks merit.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, quashed a corruption conviction, and set aside sentence and orders after finding the prosecution had not proved the counts beyond reasonable doubt.
Court of Appeal upheld convictions of the first two appellants for armed robbery, relying on identification and recent possession, but acquitted the third for insufficient evidence.
Second appeal in an armed-robbery conviction. The Court of Appeal found the identification evidence unsafe and allowed the appeal, quashing the conviction.
The identification evidence was not reliable or sufficient to justify conviction, as conditions for identification were not favourable and the credibility of prosecution testimony was undermined. The convictions were therefore unsafe and must be quashed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
