|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1992 |
|
|
Acquittal upheld because a written agreement was not a confession and prosecution failed to prove cheating beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – cheating – requirement to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt – effect of delay in reporting alleged offence on credibility. * Documentary evidence – whether a written agreement constitutes a confession or admission of criminality. * Appellate review – interference with acquittal where prosecution evidence is weak.
|
16 December 1992 |
|
Conviction quashed where night-time identification was unreliable and lacked corroborative evidence.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Night-time incident with gunfire and injured witnesses – Identification unreliable without descriptive particulars or corroboration. * Criminal law – Evidence – Failure to recover stolen property as absence of corroboration. * Criminal procedure – Appeal – Conviction unsafe and liable to be quashed where identification is unreliable.
|
16 December 1992 |
|
Appeal allowed: convictions for theft/destruction set aside where appellant was wrongly convicted on an uncharged count and evidence was insufficient.
Criminal law – Conviction on count not charged – Trial court erred in convicting appellant on an uncharged count; insufficient evidence to show appellant was custodian or had access to stolen receipts – Convictions, sentences and compensation orders set aside.
|
16 December 1992 |
|
Appeal against rape conviction dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld based on clear identification and supporting medical and circumstantial evidence.
Criminal law – Rape – Sufficiency of evidence and corroboration – Identification in daylight; medical evidence (ruptured hymen and blood) as supportive; appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.
|
16 December 1992 |
|
|
16 December 1992 |
|
Appeal dismissed: conviction for stealing municipal funds upheld; sentence increased to statutory five-year minimum.
* Criminal law – Stealing by servant – possession of municipal receipt book and sold receipts as proof of collection and misappropriation.
* Evidence – documentary evidence (receipt book) may discharge need to call payers where receipts show amounts collected.
* Mens rea – illness or intention to return money does not necessarily negate criminal intent to steal.
* Sentencing – where property belongs to a specified authority statutory minimum sentence applies.
|
10 December 1992 |
| November 1992 |
|
|
Court upheld a single eyewitness identification, found common intention and malice, convicted both accused of murder and sentenced them to death.
Criminal law – murder – single eye‑witness identification in daylight; alibi and credibility; common intention and malice aforethought; causation of death; mandatory death sentence.
|
26 November 1992 |
|
Appeal dismissed where eyewitness accounts, circumstantial evidence and an extra-judicial confession upheld the conviction and sentence.
Criminal law – robbery and sexual assault – credibility of eyewitness and bystander observations – weight of extra-judicial confession to village authorities – appeal dismissed for lack of merit.
|
11 November 1992 |
|
Eyewitness identification in daylight supported conviction for cattle theft; conviction upheld, sentence and compensation order varied.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — Eye‑witness identification at close range in daylight — Trial court’s credibility findings — Sufficiency of prosecution case in alleged cattle theft — Sentence appropriateness and variation — Compensation order.
|
11 November 1992 |
|
Conviction for receiving stolen goods quashed where items were not positively identified and accomplice evidence lacked corroboration.
* Criminal law – Receiving stolen property – proof requires identification of stolen goods and knowledge by possessor; recent possession alone insufficient. * Criminal procedure – Evidence of co-accused/accomplice – requires independent corroboration before supporting conviction.
|
9 November 1992 |
|
Conviction for bribery quashed due to contradictions, procedural irregularities and insufficient evidence creating reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Corruption/bribery charge – sufficiency of evidence – contradictory witness accounts; trap-money serial number discrepancies; chain of custody and procedural irregularities; appellate quashing of unsafe conviction.
|
9 November 1992 |
|
Evidence of assisting sale of stolen goods and voluntary co‑accused confessions upheld appellant’s conviction for robbery with violence.
* Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Night‑time invasion and theft of corrugated iron sheets – Evidence of subsequent sale and possession as proof of participation.
* Criminal law – Admissions and confessions – Co‑accused confessions found voluntary and admissible.
* Criminal law – Common purpose doctrine – Assisting disposal of stolen property as participation in offence.
* Sentencing – Seven years’ imprisonment affirmed on appeal.
|
6 November 1992 |
|
Conviction based on unreliable, inconsistent identification and lack of corroboration was unsafe and quashed.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — Dock identification, inconsistencies in witness accounts, delay in arrest, absence of identification parade and lack of corroboration — Unsafe conviction quashed.
|
6 November 1992 |
|
Appeals dismissed: identification, confessions, recovered gun and stolen items sufficiently proved guilt; lending the firearm justified principal liability and 30‑year sentence.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Identification evidence (voice recognition and in‑the‑act observations) – Confessions and corroboration – Possession of stolen property – Liability of lender of firearm as principal offender – Statutory minimum sentence.
|
6 November 1992 |
|
Appeal raising whether night-time and child-identification evidence was reliable enough to sustain robbery with violence convictions.
* Criminal law – identification evidence – night-time identification – reliability and opportunity to observe. * Competency and credibility of child witness in identification. * Misidentification of co-accused and impact on safety of conviction. * Sentencing – application of Minimum Sentences Act.
|
6 November 1992 |
|
Appellant’s conviction and five-year mandatory sentence upheld based on reliable identification and statutory minimum sentence.
Criminal law – Theft – Identification evidence and identification parade – accomplice evidence requiring corroboration – Minimum Sentences Act – mandatory five-year sentence where stolen property from government body exceeds statutory value.
|
5 November 1992 |
|
Whether malice aforethought was proved; conviction reduced to manslaughter and 13-year imprisonment imposed.
Criminal law – Murder vs manslaughter – Malice aforethought – Benefit of doubt where alternative factual inferences exist – Retreating accused confronted from behind – Sentencing: mitigating factors (first offender, remand, cultural use of knives) weighed against public protection and deterrence.
|
4 November 1992 |
|
Acquittal set aside for building without permit; conviction substituted but respondent conditionally discharged under section 38(1).
Township (Building) Rules – erection of building without permit or approved plan – absence of permit/plan constitutes offence; Criminal procedure – appellate review of acquittal – trial magistrate's misdirection; Penal Code s.38(1) – conditional discharge and good behaviour bond as mitigating disposal.
|
3 November 1992 |
|
High Court will not reduce a lawfully imposed statutory minimum sentence; reduction must await applicable legal authority or proper appeal.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act – whether superior court can reduce a sentence below statutory minimum where trial court correctly applied the Act; procedure for seeking sentence reduction (appeal vs application); mitigation insufficient to displace statutory minimum.
|
2 November 1992 |
| October 1992 |
|
|
Convictions for robbery quashed where identification was unreliable and prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – identification evidence – reliability where arrest occurred distant from scene and after pursuit; absence of recovered stolen property; appellate review where trial court failed properly to analyze identification and give benefit of doubt.
|
30 October 1992 |
|
Appeal allowed: convictions quashed where prosecution evidence was contradictory and defence raised reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – burden of proof and benefit of the doubt – evaluation of prosecution versus defence evidence – appellant entitled to acquittal where contradictions and delays undermine prosecution case; conviction on lesser offence unsafe where trial court failed to properly assess evidence.
|
30 October 1992 |
|
Accused found legally sane and guilty of murder (malice aforethought); convicted and sentenced to death by hanging.
* Criminal law – Murder – malice aforethought – repeated, deliberate blows with a weapon constitute malice despite provocation.
* Criminal law – Insanity – psychiatric and medical evidence held accused sane; defence of insanity rejected.
* Evidence – admissibility of extra‑judicial and cautioned statements – statements admitted and relied upon to corroborate guilt.
* Procedure – witness competency and procedural irregularities – court disregarded some witness evidence but still convicted on remaining evidence.
|
30 October 1992 |
|
Appellant's diamond-theft conviction quashed for insufficiency of evidence and procedural gaps undermining chain of custody.
Criminal law – theft of diamonds – proof beyond reasonable doubt – failure to prove procedure for issuance and checking of diamonds and inconsistencies in witnesses’ accounts – conviction quashed.
|
28 October 1992 |
|
The appellant's late appeal was struck out as time-barred; leave granted to seek extension by chamber application with affidavit.
Criminal appeals – statutory time limits (notice within 10 days; petition within 45 days) – appeal out of time requires chamber application and affidavit showing good cause – failure to apply renders appeal incompetent – remedy: strike out with leave to apply for extension.
|
27 October 1992 |
|
Court ordered transfer of two criminal cases to the Resident Magistrate Court, Mbeya in the interest of justice.
Criminal procedure – transfer/change of venue of pending criminal proceedings – exercise of judicial discretion in the interest of justice – effect of affidavit and prosecution’s concurrence on transfer order.
|
27 October 1992 |
|
Conviction for theft set aside where unreliable, uncorroborated audit evidence and procedural defects created reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Theft by clerk or servant – Reliance on single auditor’s evidence – Need for corroboration and production of supporting documents; procedural fairness in stock-taking and audit; contradictions in key witness evidence undermining prosecution case.
|
26 October 1992 |
|
Convictions for cattle theft were quashed where accomplice evidence and identifications were inadequately assessed.
Criminal law – Theft – Identification of stolen property – Production of exhibits not always necessary where distinctive marks and witness evidence establish ownership; Corroboration – Evidence of accomplice requires caution and independent corroboration; Appeal and revision – High Court may, under revisional jurisdiction, quash conviction and set aside sentence where convictions are unsafe.
|
26 October 1992 |
|
Appeal allowed: conviction quashed where uncorroborated, inconsistent accomplice evidence and prosecution failed to prove guilt.
Criminal law – Conviction based on uncorroborated accomplice evidence – Necessity for caution and corroboration; prosecution’s burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; appellate intervention where trial court disregards credible defence.
|
26 October 1992 |
|
The High Court held that where an offence is triable only by the High Court, trials in Primary and District Courts are nullities and the appeal was dismissed.
* Criminal jurisdiction – scope of inferior courts’ jurisdiction – offences triable only by the High Court under section 214 of the Penal Code – proceedings in Primary and District Courts held to be nullities where jurisdiction lacking.
|
23 October 1992 |
|
Conviction for unlawful possession quashed for inadequate proof of ownership and improper sentencing under the Minimum Sentences Act.
Criminal law — unlawful possession — proof of ownership and identification — insufficiency of vague identifying features; failure to corroborate custodial evidence by police witnesses; alternative convicting on unlawful possession where theft not proved; sentencing — improper application of Minimum Sentences Act to non‑scheduled offence (ultra vires).
|
22 October 1992 |
|
Conviction for robbery quashed due to unreliable identification, contradictory search evidence, and lack of corroboration.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – identification evidence – necessity for police identification parade where circumstances not described – recent possession doctrine – corroboration of accomplice’s implication – contradictions in search and exhibit evidence – burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
|
21 October 1992 |
|
Applications for leave to appeal out of time dismissed as frivolous and without prospects of success.
Criminal procedure – application for leave to appeal out of time – delay alleged due to prison conditions and late supply of judgment copies – court may refuse extension where appeal is frivolous or has no prospects – reference to section 364(1)(b) Criminal Procedure Act.
|
21 October 1992 |
|
Conviction for shopbreaking and stealing quashed for insufficiency of evidence and improbability of watchman’s guilt.
Criminal law – theft/shopbreaking – sufficiency of evidence; circumstantial evidence and credibility; duty and vulnerability of a night watchman; onus on the State to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
7 October 1992 |
|
Appeal allowed: conviction for breaking and stealing set aside where evidence was insufficient and State did not support conviction.
Criminal law – Breaking into a building and stealing – Sufficiency of evidence – Possession of stolen property and absence from duty – State electing not to support conviction – Appeal allowing setting aside of conviction and sentence.
|
7 October 1992 |
|
Identification by torchlight and recovery of stolen goods sufficiently supported convictions for armed robbery; 30-year sentences upheld.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Identification evidence – Identification by torch/flashlight at scene – Reliability and corroboration by recovery of stolen goods. * Evidence – Recovery and identification of stolen property as corroboration of eyewitness identification. * Sentence – 30 years imprisonment for armed robbery – held to be lawful and minimum appropriate in circumstances.
|
6 October 1992 |
|
Insufficient evidence of breaking or possession of stolen property; acquittal restored and convictions quashed.
* Criminal law – Burglary and theft – sufficiency of evidence – requirement to prove breaking and stealing beyond reasonable doubt – identification and recovery of stolen property – appellate interference with convictions where evidence insufficient.
|
5 October 1992 |
|
Conviction for stealing school iron sheets quashed where prosecution failed to prove appellant received or had exclusive possession.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Proof of receipt/possession – Circumstantial and witness evidence – Chain of custody and exclusivity of possession – Insufficient evidence renders conviction unsafe.
|
5 October 1992 |
|
Application for leave to appeal out of time dismissed for lacking arguable grounds; applicant found with a firearm.
Criminal law – Application for extension of time to appeal – Requirement of reasonable prospects of success – Applicant found red‑handed with firearm during search operation – Out‑of‑time appeal dismissed for lack of arguable grounds.
|
2 October 1992 |
|
Application for leave to appeal out of time dismissed because evidence against the applicant was overwhelming and appeal lacked prospects.
Appeal — application for leave to appeal out of time — requirement to show good cause and reasonable prospects of success — court may refuse extension where evidence against applicant is overwhelming; Criminal law — impersonation, fraud, eyewitness identification.
|
2 October 1992 |
| September 1992 |
|
|
Appeal against burglary and stealing convictions dismissed due to credible identification of owner-marked items found in appellant’s possession.
* Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – Conviction upheld where complainant positively identified personally marked/stencilled items recovered from accused’s premises.
* Evidence – Identification of stolen property – Bearing of owner’s name and distinctive painting held probative of ownership and link to accused.
* Appeal – Credibility findings by trial court respected on appeal absent compelling reason to upset them.
|
29 September 1992 |
|
Conviction based on police-station identification of seized property is unsafe without independent witnesses or secure chain of custody.
* Criminal law – Evidence – Identification of stolen property – Reliability of identification made at police station without accused or independent witnesses – Chain of custody and possibility of evidence tampering rendering conviction unsafe.
|
28 September 1992 |
|
Conviction under s.383 quashed where no evidence showed the watchman knew a felony was being committed or imminent.
* Criminal law – Neglect to prevent offence (s.383 Penal Code) – elements require knowledge of a felony being committed or imminent and failure to prevent it.
* Evidence – absence of proof of accused's knowledge defeats conviction for failure-to-prevent offence.
* Conduct of leaving duty without reporting does not, without more, satisfy mens rea for s.383 offence.
|
28 September 1992 |
|
|
24 September 1992 |
|
Appeal challenges safety of conviction based on night-time and delayed identification, including voice recognition.
* Criminal law – identification evidence – night-time identification using torchlight and voice recognition; reliability and safety of identification; delayed identification; lack of descriptive particulars.
|
21 September 1992 |
|
Leave for certiorari was refused because the applicant failed to exhaust internal administrative remedies and sued the wrong party.
* Administrative law – judicial review – certiorari – requirement to exhaust internal administrative/employment remedies before seeking judicial review.* Public service law – termination/retirement of public servants – proper respondent and locus of power (President/Chief Secretary) vs agent (Director General).* Procedure – Attorney General’s consent to sue and professional body intervention do not substitute for exhausting employment grievance channels.
|
14 September 1992 |
|
|
4 September 1992 |
|
The appellants' appeal against conviction and sentence for theft dismissed; eyewitness identification and parade were sufficient.
Criminal law – Theft (s.265 Penal Code) – Sufficiency of eyewitness identification – Identification parade – Credibility of eyewitnesses – Sentence appropriateness.
|
2 September 1992 |
|
Acquitted of breaking and stealing but convicted of receiving stolen property; compensation reduced to account for recovered items.
* Criminal law – Store breaking and stealing – When a co‑accused’s confession that he acted alone negates sufficient proof that another accused participated in the actual breaking. * Criminal law – Corroboration – Recovered stolen property can corroborate possession but does not necessarily prove participation in the break‑in. * Criminal law – Receiving stolen property (s.311(1)) – Possession/keeping of stolen goods supports conviction for receiving. * Remedies – Compensation reduced to account for recovered items; enforcement by distress or imprisonment in lieu.
|
2 September 1992 |
|
First appellant acquitted for lack of guilty knowledge; second appellant's conviction upheld but sentence reduced to six years; four watches returned.
* Criminal law – receiving stolen property – requirement of guilty knowledge – acquittal where knowledge not proved. * Criminal law – identification evidence – sufficiency to uphold conviction for burglary/shop-breaking and retention of stolen goods. * Sentencing – first offender – inflation of sentence above minimum; appellate reduction from eight to six years. * Restitution – return of recovered property to complainant.
|
2 September 1992 |
| August 1992 |
|
|
Appeal against armed robbery conviction dismissed; identification and sufficiency of evidence upheld and sentence, corporal punishment, and compensation confirmed.
Criminal law – Armed robbery with violence – sufficiency of evidence and identification – prior acquaintance and lighting for identification – use of firearm and attendant violence – appellate review of trial court findings.
|
28 August 1992 |