|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1971 |
|
|
Unproven set-off or lien cannot justify discharge under s.205; accused must be called if prosecution makes a prima facie case.
* Criminal procedure – no-case-to-answer – distinction between prima facie case (s.205) and proof of defence (s.206).
* Agency law – duty of agent to account; alleged lien or set-off for commission requires evidence.
* Evidence – sufficiency of prosecution proof to call accused to answer charges.
* Procedure – retention of exhibits pending expiry of appeal period where acquittal is entered.
|
29 December 1971 |
|
The applicant’s theft of party-collected funds constitutes theft and attracts mandatory Minimum Sentence Act penalties.
Criminal law – Theft by agent/collector of political party funds – Distinction between servant (employee) and agent/collector; Minimum Sentence Act 1963 – para 3, Part I applicability where stolen property belongs to a political party; necessity of proving lawful claim or special circumstances under s5(2) to avoid mandatory sentence.
|
24 December 1971 |
|
Appeal against conviction for shop-breaking and stealing summarily rejected as lacking sufficient grounds.
Criminal law – shop-breaking and stealing – sufficiency of evidence for conviction – sentencing under Minimum Sentences Act 1963 – appeal without merit – summary rejection.
|
24 December 1971 |
|
Appeal summarily rejected under s.317; conviction and sentence confirmed for lack of any arguable ground to interfere.
* Criminal procedure — Appeal — Summary rejection under section 317 Criminal Procedure Code — appellate court will summarily dismiss an appeal lacking arguable merit.
* Appeal — Review of conviction and sentence — appellate court will not interfere absent clear error in findings of fact or misdirection in law.
* Sentencing — trial court’s assessment of prevalence of offence and circumstances may be upheld where no demonstrable error appears.
|
17 December 1971 |
| November 1971 |
|
|
Appeal allowed in part: corporal punishment reduced from thirty‑two to twenty‑four strokes; imprisonment sentences affirmed.
Criminal law – sentencing – corporal punishment – appellate variation of sentence – reduction of number of strokes from 32 to 24; imprisonment terms otherwise affirmed.
|
26 November 1971 |
Thomas John and 3 Others vs Republic (High Court Criminal Appeals Nos 434, 435, 486, and 487 of 1971; High Court Criminal Appeals Nos 434, 435, 486, and 487 of 1971; High Court Criminal Appeals Nos 434, 435, 486, and 487 of 1971; High Court Criminal Appeals Nos 434, 435, 486, and 487 of 1971) [1971] TZHC 197 (26 November 1971)
Recent possession of stolen goods shortly after burglary supported convictions; statutory minimum sentences were appropriate.
* Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – Recent possession of stolen property as evidence of guilt.
* Criminal law – Identification of stolen property – Use of initials, descriptions and receipts to identify property.
* Criminal procedure – Assessment of defences: purchase, pledge, possession for another, or planting by police.
* Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act 1963 – scheduled offences and application of statutory minimum penalties and corporal punishment.
|
26 November 1971 |
|
Criminal appeal summarily rejected for lack of merit; sentence upheld as not excessive given appellants' share in cattle theft.
* Criminal appeal – summary rejection under s.317 (read with s.352) Criminal Procedure Code – appeal lacking sufficient grounds – sentence not excessive – cattle theft.
|
24 November 1971 |
|
Magistrate erred by acquitting despite a prima facie case; accused should be called to answer for simple stealing.
Criminal procedure — no-case submission — trial court must consider lesser or other offences under Criminal Procedure Code (ss.181–189) — charge of stealing by public servant (s.270 Penal Code) may support conviction for simple stealing (s.265 Penal Code) — Joseph Selmani v R distinguished.
|
17 November 1971 |
|
Whether identification and unexplained presence near the scene sufficiently linked the appellants to armed robbery and justified harsher sentences.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Identification evidence and recognition; Circumstantial evidence – arrest near abandoned getaway vehicle within 24 hours and unexplained presence; Sentence – aggravating factors justify enhancement above statutory minimum.
|
8 November 1971 |
|
The appellant’s conviction for stealing government funds was upheld; appeal and sentence dismissed for lack of merit.
Criminal law – Stealing by person employed in public service – burden of proof and credibility – appellate review of magistrate’s findings; Criminal Procedure Code s.206 – accused’s opportunity to give evidence and call witnesses; sentence appeal – minimum sentence affirmed.
|
8 November 1971 |
| October 1971 |
|
|
Conviction for cattle theft upheld on recent possession despite weakened identification; sentence not increased.
Criminal law – Theft of cattle – Conviction supported by doctrine of recent possession despite weakened identification evidence; acquittal of co-accused not fatal; robbery not proved; sentence not enhanced.
|
27 October 1971 |
|
Appeal dismissed: convictions for malicious damage and wrongful confinement upheld; abusive language alone does not constitute assault.
Criminal law – malicious damage to property; wrongful confinement – taking a person to police station without lawful cause; assault – abusive language alone not assault; credibility of witnesses and sufficiency of evidence; sentence review.
|
26 October 1971 |
|
Conviction upheld on evidence, but unproved prior convictions required sentence reduction and prompted an order (in the record) for retrial by another magistrate.
* Criminal law – Sufficiency of evidence – Conviction for entering dwelling with intent and for stealing – identification and recovery of stolen property; corroborating witness evidence.
* Criminal procedure – Sentencing – Prior convictions must be proved under section 143(1) before being used to aggravate sentence; mere enumeration is insufficient.
* Criminal procedure – Fair trial considerations – retrial may be ordered before another magistrate in the interests of justice.
|
22 October 1971 |
|
Recent-possession and technical serial-number evidence supported conviction for receiving stolen property, not necessarily for housebreaking.
Criminal law – theft and receiving stolen property – recent possession doctrine – serial numbers as primary identification evidence – authenticity of concealed serial and allegation of tampering while in police custody.
|
22 October 1971 |
|
Threats with a panga to obtain and retain another’s clothes constituted robbery; conviction amended and minimum sentence imposed.
* Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Threats with a weapon immediately before/during taking – elements of robbery satisfied where violence aimed to obtain or retain property. * Relationship to occupant irrelevant as a defence to robbery. * Intent to permanently deprive may be inferred from subsequent conduct and failure to return property. * Sentencing – scheduled offence under Minimum Sentences Act: two years’ imprisonment and 24 strokes.
|
22 October 1971 |
|
Applicant’s conviction for theft upheld; sentence increased from one to three years on appeal.
Theft (s.265 Penal Code) – sufficiency of eyewitness testimony and recovery of stolen property – right to call defence witnesses – appellate enhancement of unduly lenient sentence.
|
19 October 1971 |
|
Possession two years after burglary cannot ground a recent-possession presumption, but concealment supported conviction for retaining stolen property.
Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – doctrine of recent possession – temporal gap (two years) precludes presumption of guilt; Receiving/retaining stolen property (s311) – proof of guilty knowledge may be inferred from denial and concealment; Safe-custody defence – mere custody without guilty knowledge requires acquittal.
|
13 October 1971 |
|
The applicant's theft via forged withdrawal forms was a scheduled public‑service offence; sentences for theft were reduced for mitigation.
Criminal law – forgery and theft by public servant – theft "by virtue of employment" – scheduled offence under Minimum Sentences Act; sentencing – aggravation (public confidence) weighed against mitigation (first offender, long service lost, small amount, guilty plea) – reduction of excessive minimum sentences.
|
8 October 1971 |
|
Forfeiture quashed where owner proved title, lawful temporary transfer, and non‑involvement in the offence.
Criminal law – forfeiture of property – Forfeiture of a firearm belonging to a third party – proof of ownership and police permit to transfer – sworn denial of involvement – court’s power to quash unjust forfeiture.
|
1 October 1971 |
|
Fingerprint expert evidence upheld; conviction affirmed and sentences increased for serious break‑ins.
* Criminal law – Evidence – fingerprint identification – expert comparison held sufficient to link accused to break-ins.
* Criminal law – Credibility – accused’s explanation for fingerprints found on crime scene rejected as implausible.
* Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act – appellate increase where trial court unduly lenient and offences serious and prevalent.
* Procedure – appellate courts may quash and substitute sentences when trial court errs in characterising offence gravity.
|
1 October 1971 |
|
Court upheld convictions (adjusted liability), excluded unreliable office confession, quashed corporal punishment, confirmed two-year sentences.
Criminal law – theft by person employed in public service – admissibility and voluntariness of confessions – reliability of witness accounts – forged payment vouchers – application of Minimum Sentences Act 1963 and corporal punishment to parastatal institutions – restitution ordered.
|
1 October 1971 |
|
Alleged confession unreliable but other evidence sufficed to uphold convictions; corporal punishment set aside, two-year sentences and restitution ordered.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Admissibility and reliability of confession – Conflicting witness accounts – Forged payment vouchers – Liability despite excluding confession – Sentencing: Minimum Sentences Act misapplied; corporal punishment set aside.
|
1 October 1971 |
| September 1971 |
|
|
Appeals against convictions and sentences for obtaining goods by false pretences were dismissed; sentences upheld.
Criminal law – Obtaining goods by false pretences (s.302 Penal Code) – Proof of intent to defraud – Concerted action between participants – Sentencing: assessment of antecedents and mitigation; sentences not manifestly excessive.
|
24 September 1971 |
|
Appellate court upheld concern about public danger from a forged driving licence but reduced sentence for guilty first offender.
Criminal law – uttering a false document (forged driving licence) – sentencing – public danger from possession of forged licence – mitigating factors: guilty plea and first offender – misdirection in sentencing.
|
24 September 1971 |
|
The applicant’s theft of an Ujamaa village net was simple theft, not Government property theft, so minimum sentence removed.
Criminal law – Theft – Ujamaa village property – Whether village property equals Government property for Minimum Sentences Act – Gift by Government – Simple theft – Sentence reduction.
|
17 September 1971 |
|
An unequivocal guilty plea bars appeal against conviction; magistrate’s sentence, based on public harm and deterrence, is upheld.
Criminal procedure – Plea of guilty – Unequivocal plea admitting facts bars appeal against conviction (s.313(1) CPC); Sentencing – Magistrate may consider prevalence, social harm and deterrence; political remarks not necessarily extraneous to sentencing.
|
17 September 1971 |
|
Appeal dismissed except escape conviction quashed and sentence adjusted; convictions for theft and bhang possession upheld.
Criminal law – theft by servant – sufficiency of evidence where accused found in possession of stolen goods; Criminal law – possession of bhang – defence of medicinal use not accepted; Criminal law – escaping lawful custody – offence not made out where suspect fled prior to arrest; Sentencing – fines must be proportionate to accused’s means; substitution of imprisonment where fine would be punitive by default of payment.
|
17 September 1971 |
|
Conviction for failure to keep firearms records upheld, but fine reduced because trial court failed to inquire into appellant's means.
Criminal law – conviction for failure to keep firearms records – conviction upheld; Sentencing – duty to inquire into offender’s means before imposing fines – failure to inquire renders fine manifestly excessive – appellate reduction of sentence.
|
13 September 1971 |
|
Possession of stolen cattle parts sustained convictions; appeals dismissed as lacking any sufficient ground.
* Criminal law – Theft of livestock – Possession of stolen animal parts as evidence supporting conviction under Penal Code ss.265, 268.
* Criminal appeals – Sufficiency of grounds – Appeal dismissed as without merit where conviction and statutory minimum sentence properly imposed.
* Sentencing – Minimum prescribed punishment – three years imprisonment plus statutory corporal punishment.
|
11 September 1971 |
|
The appellant’s inconsistent account and delayed reporting supported conviction for theft by a public servant; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Theft by public servant – prosecution proved appropriation of funds entrusted for subsistence allowances.
* Evidence – credibility and inconsistencies – delay in reporting loss and omissions in cross‑examination outweighed defendant’s account.
* Appeal – appellate court will not disturb credibility findings unless shown to be unreasonable.
* Sentence – courts may weigh small monetary value against loss of employment benefits; sentence upheld.
|
11 September 1971 |
|
Appellant's robbery conviction quashed as unsafe; court imposed statutory corporal punishment and minimum term on co‑accused in revision.
* Criminal law – Robbery – Safety of conviction – appellate review where evidence suggests co‑accused rather than appellant possessed stolen property. * Sentencing – Mandatory corporal punishment for scheduled offences – omission by magistrate and exercise of revisionary powers. * Sentencing procedure – cannot enhance sentence without giving convicted person chance to show cause; discretion to adjust to statutory minimum when no special circumstances.
|
10 September 1971 |
|
|
10 September 1971 |
|
Appeal dismissed: stolen property properly identified and conviction and sentence upheld.
Criminal law – proof of stolen property – identification by complainant and matching serial number; possession as evidence of theft; appellant's right to call witnesses – record showing no witness; hearsay – not fatal where independent identification and physical evidence exist; sentencing – minimum statutory term appropriate given value of property.
|
10 September 1971 |
|
Whether intent to steal was proved and special circumstances justify imposing less than the statutory minimum sentence.
Criminal law – Housebreaking with intent to steal – Proof of intent by eyewitness evidence and recovery of implement; Appellate rehearing powers on first appeal; Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act – special circumstances allowing sentence below statutory minimum.
|
10 September 1971 |
|
Insufficient evidence of malice aforethought; conviction reduced to manslaughter due to conflicting witness accounts.
Criminal law – murder versus manslaughter – malice aforethought; intoxication and mens rea; mistake of fact/ignorance of law; self-defence; weight of conflicting eyewitness evidence and contemporaneous statements.
|
6 September 1971 |
|
Court upheld conviction for theft despite misreading of handwriting expert and minor evidential misdirections.
* Criminal law – Theft by servant – cashier accused of stealing firm funds via forged pay sheet. * Evidence – Handwriting expert – expert excluded certain authors but did not identify forger; mischaracterisation of expert evidence. * Evidence – Ink similarity admissible but cannot alone establish common source without expert proof. * Evidence – Accomplice rule and corroboration – witness not an accomplice; independent corroboration present. * Sentence – Eighteen months imprisonment for substantial theft from a public/para-statal institution upheld.
|
1 September 1971 |
|
Failure of a trial judgment to give reasons breached s.171(1) CPC but did not occasion failure of justice; conviction upheld, sentence reduced to 30 months.
* Criminal procedure – duty of trial court to give points for determination and reasons in written judgment – section 171(1) CPC. * Grounds of appeal – omission of reasons not fatal unless it occasions failure of justice. * Evidence – identification and recovery of stolen property as strong corroboration supporting conviction. * Sentencing – appellate reduction of custodial sentence for first offenders.
|
1 September 1971 |
| August 1971 |
|
|
Conviction for robbery upheld on reliable identification and recovery evidence; sentence reduced to three and a half years.
* Criminal law – Robbery – Identification evidence – Complainant and shop assistant identification held reliable despite minor discrepancies. * Criminal law – Alibi and claim of frame-up – Rejected where witnesses had opportunity to observe and identification and recovery evidence consistent. * Sentencing – Excessive sentence reduced on appeal having regard to youth and mitigating factors.
|
27 August 1971 |
|
Conviction upheld: possession of stolen property proved; unlawfully obtained evidence admitted under Kuruma relevance test.
* Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – possession of recently stolen property as evidence of guilt.
* Evidence – admissibility – relevance test; unlawfully obtained evidence admissible if relevant (Kuruma bin Kani principle).
* Procedure – search warrant absence – irregularity does not automatically exclude evidence.
* Sentencing – minimum statutory sentence for scheduled offence upheld.
|
27 August 1971 |
|
Evidence showed concerted use of authority and violence to rob victims; convictions and sentences upheld, with minor corrections.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – common design and conspiracy – colourable receipts do not convert theft into lawful collection; abuse of official position aggravates offence – sentencing discretion under s.5(2) Minimum Sentences Act properly withheld – correction of record and setting aside of sentence imposed on uncharged count.
|
27 August 1971 |
|
Third appellant’s conviction quashed for lack of corroboration; first and second appellants’ corporal punishment reduced to statutory minimum.
Evidence — admissibility of information discovered consequential to accused’s statements (s.31 Evidence Act); confessions to police inadmissible under s.27 except insofar as they lead to discoverable facts; necessity of independent corroboration before convicting on police testimony of confessions; appellate intervention where conviction rests on uncorroborated police evidence; sentencing — reduction of excessive corporal punishment to statutory minimum.
|
27 August 1971 |
|
Convictions for false accounting, forgery and theft quashed for failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt; forgery and fraudulent accounting – significance of admitted alterations and absence of initials; character evidence – prior shortages; proof of stealing by servant – necessity of reliable contemporaneous records/receipts.
|
27 August 1971 |
|
Accused who killed a child found not guilty by reason of insanity and ordered detained in a mental institution.
Criminal law – Insanity – Plea of insanity accepted where psychiatric report and assessors conclude accused lacked capacity – Special finding under s.168 CPC and compulsory detention under s.168(2)(a) – Admissibility of psychiatric report under s.166(3) CPC.
|
26 August 1971 |
|
Possession of stock in a specified area invokes s.3(1) reverse onus; appellant failed to prove lawful possession; appeal dismissed.
Stock Theft Ordinance s.3(1) – possession in a specified area; reverse evidential onus on accused to show lawful possession; sufficiency of account; conviction upheld; statutory minimum sentence confirmed.
|
25 August 1971 |
|
Circumstantial and forensic blood evidence supported involvement but failed to prove malice; convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to seven years.
* Criminal law – homicide – murder v. manslaughter – required proof of malice aforethought; circumstantial evidence must exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence. * Forensic evidence – blood-stains and blood-group matching supportive but not determinative of malice or identity of the fatal assailant. * Evidence – weight of witness statements and prior joint charge affecting credibility; assessors’ verdict and trial judge’s ultimate finding.
|
24 August 1971 |
|
An appellate court reduced an excessive 12‑month sentence to immediate release due to guilty plea and first‑offender mitigation.
Criminal law – Uttering a false document (forged driving licence) – Sentence – Mitigating factors: guilty plea and first‑offender status – Appellate reduction of manifestly excessive sentence – Role of evidence in magistrate's factual generalisations.
|
14 August 1971 |
|
Conviction for stealing goods in transit upheld; alleged prior convictions not proved but two-year sentence affirmed.
* Criminal law – Theft of goods in transit – conviction upheld where appellant caught with parcel bearing railway seals and identified by consignor and parcels clerk. * Criminal procedure – Proof of previous convictions – section 143 Criminal Procedure Code prescribes three modes of proof and requires identity with accused. * Evidence – Carbon copy of conviction records and non-matching names insufficient to prove prior convictions. * Sentencing – seriousness of thefts of public/railway property and public interest may justify custodial sentence for deterrence.
|
11 August 1971 |
|
Conviction for burglary upheld, but sentence reduced due to 'special circumstances' under the Minimum Sentences Act.
Criminal law – Burglary and theft – Sufficiency and credibility of eyewitness evidence – Appeal against conviction; Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act 1963 s.5(2) – Meaning of 'special circumstances' – schoolboy status, youth, first offender and low value of property as mitigating factors – substitution of sentence.
|
11 August 1971 |
|
Voir dire must establish a childs competency, but defilement convictions require independent corroboration which was lacking.
Criminal law child witness competence and voir dire (s.153(3) CPC) requirement for independent corroboration in sexual offences scope of corroboration (independent connection to offence) evaluation of circumstantial and identification evidence.
|
7 August 1971 |
| July 1971 |
|
|
Conviction quashed for lack of cogent evidence; appellant discharged and repatriation to home town recommended.
* Criminal law – Appeal – Insufficiency of evidence – Conviction unsafe where arresting witnesses did not testify and no explanation linked accused to stolen property; conviction quashed and accused discharged. * Court recommendation – Repatriation of discharged offender with multiple prior convictions.
|
31 July 1971 |