In the case of Ramadhani Bakari Yusuph @ Dodo versus The Republic, the appellant was convicted of an unnatural offence, specifically having carnal knowledge of a minor, contrary to section 154 (1) (a) and (2) of the Penal Code. The crime occurred on the evening of 17th September, 2020, at Madangwa village in the District and Region of Lindi, where the appellant had carnal knowledge of a three-year-old girl, referred to as "the victim" to protect her identity.
The appellant pleaded guilty to the offence at the trial court and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Dissatisfied with the conviction and sentence, he appealed to the High Court but lost. Still aggrieved, he brought his case before the Court of Appeal with eight points of grievance, challenging the decision of the High Court.
The issues raised by the appellant included the irregularity and impropriety of the trial court proceedings, the claim that his guilty plea was a result of misapprehension or mistake, the assertion that the prosecution case was not proven to the required standard, and the claim that the conviction and sentence were upheld without proof of the victim being underage or without satisfying himself with the appellant's mental health at that time.
The Court of Appeal considered the following two issues: firstly, whether the appellant's plea to the charged offence was unequivocal to ground conviction; and, secondly, whether the sentence of life imprisonment imposed by the trial court on the appellant and upheld by the High Court was illegal.
The Court of Appeal dismissed all the appellant's grievances, stating that his plea of guilty was unequivocal and that the sentence imposed was the minimum provided under section 154 (1) (c) of the Penal Code. The court also clarified that tendering of exhibits where conviction is based on a plea of guilty is not a legal requirement, dismissing the appellant's claim about the prosecution's failure to tender the respective PF3.
