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 failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of section 127(2) of the Evidence Act in recording the evidence of the child victim, rendering her evidence inadmissible and leaving the prosecution case unproven beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The conviction was quashed and sentence set aside because the trial court failed to comply with mandatory statutory requirements for recording the evidence of child witnesses, rendering the proceedings a mistrial and necessitating a retrial before a different magistrate.
Source excerpt
The appeal was dismissed because, even after expunging the PF3, the oral evidence of the medical officer and the credible testimony of the victim and other witnesses proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt. Procedural complaints did not result in prejudice or miscarriage of justice, and the right to legal representation was not violated as it was neither automatic nor requested.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal after finding a child witness did not properly promise to tell the truth under section 127(2) of the Evidence Act.
High Court dismissed a rape appeal, upholding conviction and life sentence after finding the child complainant’s age, evidence, and corroboration were sufficiently proved.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, quashing a 30-year sentence after finding the guilty plea was not unequivocal and was unsafe to rely on.
The conviction was quashed because the evidence of the child witnesses was received without compliance with section 127(2) of the Evidence Act, rendering it inadmissible, and the PF3 was improperly admitted by the prosecutor. Without this evidence, the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The prosecution proved all elements of the unnatural offence beyond reasonable doubt; the victim's evidence was properly admitted and credible, corroborated by other evidence, and procedural irregularities were not fatal to the trial or conviction.
Source excerpt
The conviction could not stand because key prosecution witnesses (PW2 and PW3) gave unsworn evidence in violation of section 198(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, rendering their testimony and related exhibits inadmissible and valueless. Additionally, the prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody for the seized narcotic drugs, leaving reasonable doubt as to the integrity and identity of the evidence. Consequently, the prosecution did not prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed a criminal appeal after finding the child complainant’s evidence was improperly admitted, leaving insufficient proof for the conviction.
Explore more
