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
High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against a rape conviction, holding that the prosecution proved statutory rape of a 13-year-old beyond reasonable doubt.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the prosecution’s appeal, upholding acquittals in a rape case because the evidence contained material contradictions and doubt.
High Court criminal appeal against a rape conviction dismissed. The court upheld life imprisonment, finding age, penetration, and proof beyond reasonable doubt were established.
High Court criminal appeal against a rape conviction succeeded after the court found fatal contradictions in the victim’s name and inadequate evaluation of defense evidence.
The prosecution evidence contained material contradictions regarding the timing and reporting of the incident, the medical examination, and the reliability of exhibits. The child witness's evidence could not be relied upon in isolation, and the defence of fabrication due to a land dispute was not properly weighed. The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a second land appeal, holding that the respondent’s customary ownership was proved and the appellant’s certificate was invalid.
The Court of Appeal allowed a rape appeal, finding the prosecution failed to prove the appellant was the perpetrator beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution proved the elements of statutory rape beyond reasonable doubt through credible testimony of the complainant, minor contradictions did not affect the reliability of evidence, and failure to call the medical doctor was not fatal as medical evidence is not mandatory when direct evidence is sufficient.
Source excerpt
The contradiction among prosecution witnesses regarding the colour of the bag allegedly containing the drugs was material and went to the root of the case, creating reasonable doubt as to the ownership of the bag and the appellant's guilt. As such, the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt as the victim's evidence was properly admitted, corroborated by other witnesses and medical evidence, and no material contradictions or procedural defects undermined the conviction.
Source excerpt
Explore more
