Abdull Ally vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 389 of 2021) [2023] TZCA 82 (22 February 2023)

Case summary

The appellant, Abdul Ally, was charged with and convicted of rape under section 130 (1) (2) (e) and 131 (1) of the Penal Code, [Cap. 16 R.E. 2002], now R.E 2019 (the Penal Code). The crime was alleged to have occurred on 10th July, 2016 at Pugu Kona area, within Ilala District in Dar es Salaam Region, where the appellant was accused of having carnal knowledge of a girl aged fifteen (15) years, thus confirming that the victim was a minor.

The appellant denied the charge, leading to a full trial. The prosecution presented four witnesses and two pieces of documentary evidence - the victim's birth certificate and Police Forms No. 3. The appellant relied on his own evidence and did not summon any witness. The trial court found the appellant guilty based on the direct evidence by the victim, whose evidence was corroborated by two other witnesses. The appellant was sentenced to thirty (30) years imprisonment and ordered to pay TZS 300,000.00 to the victim as compensation.

The appellant appealed to the High Court, which upheld the trial court's conviction and sentence. Still protesting his innocence, the appellant approached the Court of Appeal on a second appeal. The appellant raised eight grounds of appeal, which were all dismissed by the Court of Appeal.

The court did not find any variance between the charge and the evidence on record, and found the victim to be a credible and reliable witness. The court also found that the trial court had complied with the provisions of section 231 (1) (b) of the Criminal Procedure Act [Cap. 20 R.E 2019] (the CPA), and that the exhibits were unprocedurally admitted in evidence but their contents were adequately explained by oral account of the witnesses. The court also found that the trial court's judgment was not defective for lack of point(s) of determination, evaluation and assessment of evidence contrary to the provisions of section 312 of the CPA.

The court found no cogent reasons to disturb the concurrent findings of the lower courts and dismissed the appeal in its entirety.

Loading PDF...

This document is 394.8 KB. Do you want to load it?

▲ To the top