|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1986 |
|
|
Convictions for insulting modesty and indecent assault by a teacher upheld; sentences noted as lenient but left undisturbed.
* Criminal law – Sexual offences – Insulting modesty and indecent assault by a teacher upon a pupil – Credibility of complainant and corroboration.
* Criminal procedure – Charge-sheet date discrepancy – Temporal inconsistencies not fatal where evidence supports the offences charged.
* Sentencing – Aggravating factor of teacher–pupil relationship – lenient sentences noted but not altered where already served.
|
18 December 1986 |
|
Lost trial records may lead to quashing convictions rather than ordering retrial if retrial would be unjust to the appellant.
Criminal law – Appeal – lost or missing trial record – remedy when appellate court cannot hear appeal – retrial usually ordered but may be refused if not in interest of justice – quashing convictions and setting aside sentences where appellant has effectively served most of the sentence.
|
2 December 1986 |
| November 1986 |
|
|
Appeals allowed: convictions quashed where prosecution failed to prove theft beyond reasonable doubt given system inadequacies and possible transit loss.
Criminal law – stealing by agent – sufficiency of evidence – custodial systems and dual-key safes – absence of reconciliation – possibility of third‑party tampering in transport – convictions quashed for failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
14 November 1986 |
|
Convictions quashed where prosecution failed to prove theft beyond reasonable doubt due to evidentiary gaps.
Criminal law – Stealing by agent – Proof beyond reasonable doubt – Adequacy of custodial and accounting system – Need to exclude alternative causes of loss (transport tampering) – Convictions unsafe where prosecution fails to prove reconciliation or exclude intervening loss.
|
14 November 1986 |
|
Recent possession and reliable identification of stolen property upheld as sufficient to convict the applicant; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Burglary and theft; Evidence – recent possession of stolen property as proof; Evidence – distinction between innocent purchaser and accomplice; Requirement for corroboration of accomplice evidence.
|
14 November 1986 |
|
Appeal dismissed: convictions upheld where complainants reliably identified recovered stolen property; other counts acquitted for insufficient evidence.
Criminal law — Burglary and stealing — Identification of recovered property as proof of ownership — Sufficiency of circumstantial evidence — Credibility findings — Possession of stolen property — Sentencing and previous convictions.
|
13 November 1986 |
|
An admission in defence can sustain a conviction despite a defective trial judgment; five‑year sentence upheld for breach of trust.
Criminal law – Stealing by public servant (s.271 Penal Code) – admissibility and sufficiency of an accused's admission made in defence; defective trial judgment and compliance with s.312 Criminal Procedure Act; sentence uplift for breach of trust and prevalence of offence.
|
13 November 1986 |
|
A watchman’s duty and presence at premises can, via circumstantial evidence, support conviction for large-scale theft.
* Criminal law – Theft by servant – Circumstantial evidence – Tampered window and missing stock establish theft.
* Criminal liability of watchman – duty and residence within compound can establish knowledge/participation.
* Evidence – absence of direct proof of vehicles or manpower does not preclude conviction where circumstantial facts point to participation.
* Sentencing – seriousness increased where theft involves public/parastatal property and harms the economy.
|
12 November 1986 |
|
Convictions upheld despite trial burden-shifting; burglary sentence reduced from seven to five years.
Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – possession of recently stolen property and identification by owner – improper shifting of burden of proof by trial court – curative application of Criminal Procedure Act – appellate reduction of sentence.
|
11 November 1986 |
|
Recovered, identified stolen property and corroboration sustain the appellant's robbery conviction.
* Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Identification of stolen property and recovery at place shown by accused as corroborative evidence supporting conviction. * Evidence – Credibility – Accused’s inconsistent explanation and voluntary conduct (leading to hidden property) can negate assertion of third-party fabrication. * Procedure – Search – Presence of neutral civilian neighbour as witness suffices to dispel claims of partiality.
|
10 November 1986 |
|
Sentence for permitting a defective vehicle upheld; owner's duty and seriousness of defects justified the fine.
Road Traffic Act s39(6)(a) & (5) – permitting defective vehicle to be driven – owner’s primary duty – sentencing discretion – late guilty plea – sentencing disparity between co-accused.
|
10 November 1986 |
| October 1986 |
|
|
Insufficient proof that the seized plastic bucket belonged to the complainant rendered convictions unsafe.
Criminal law – housebreaking and theft – identification of stolen property – sufficiency of proof of ownership – reliability of markings on plastic articles as identifying features – conviction unsafe where provenance not established.
|
31 October 1986 |
|
The applicant's arson conviction quashed for unreliable identification; imposed six‑year sentence was also unlawful.
Criminal law – arson – identification at night – reliability and contradictions in eye‑witness testimony; Evaluation of evidence – need to correlate witness accounts and expose inconsistencies; Defence lies – court must not equate lies with guilt; Sentencing – magistrate’s statutory sentencing limit under s.7(1) Criminal Procedure Code.
|
30 October 1986 |
|
Escape from custody alone is insufficient to prove an accused committed a contemporaneous office breaking and stealing.
Criminal law – identity and proof – where offence of office breaking and stealing is established but accused's personal commission is not proved; mere escape from custody insufficient to infer guilt – conviction quashed.
|
30 October 1986 |
|
Conviction upheld: bright moonlight and independent eyewitnesses rendered identification reliable despite alleged intoxication and delay in arrest.
* Criminal law – identification evidence – effect of alleged intoxication and lighting conditions on reliability of identification.
* Evidence – eyewitness credibility and independence of testimonies of rescues.
* Criminal procedure – delay in arrest and its effect on witness credibility and prosecution case.
|
30 October 1986 |
|
Appellate court upheld conviction and four‑year sentence where purchaser’s evidence and accused’s admission proved theft of a sewing‑machine frame.
* Criminal law – Theft by agent – Sale and possession of stolen property – purchaser’s evidence and accused’s admission corroborating conviction. * Evidence – Assessment of credibility – appellate deference to trial magistrate’s findings where story is an afterthought. * Sentence – Four years’ imprisonment upheld as appropriate.
|
30 October 1986 |
|
Appeal allowed: convictions overturned due to inadequate identification evidence and impermissible burden-shifting by the trial magistrate.
Criminal law – recent possession – sufficiency of identification evidence to prove ownership – burden of proof remains on prosecution; improper burden-shifting; inference of guilty knowledge cannot rest solely on family relationship; convictions quashed where evidence leaves reasonable doubt.
|
29 October 1986 |
|
Appeals allowed: convictions quashed where prosecution failed to prove ownership and trial magistrate shifted burden of proof.
* Criminal law – Identification of stolen property – sufficiency of descriptions and identifying marks to prove ownership beyond reasonable doubt. * Criminal procedure – Burden of proof – prosecution’s duty to prove ownership; trial magistrate must not shift burden to accused. * Criminal law – Recent possession doctrine – limited application where identification evidence is weak. * Criminal law – Conviction on assumptions or untested inferences is unsafe. * Criminal law – Receiving stolen property – requires proof of prior ownership and recipient’s guilty knowledge.
|
29 October 1986 |
|
Convictions quashed for insufficient identification of stolen goods and improper burden-shifting by the trial court.
Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – Identification of recovered property – Recent possession – Insufficiency of description and marks – Burden of proof remains on prosecution – Impermissible inferences and assumptions – Receiving stolen property – Familial relationship insufficient to infer guilty knowledge.
|
29 October 1986 |
|
Appeal dismissed: conviction for attempted stealing upheld where supervisor and driver took active steps to misappropriate utility oil.
* Criminal law – Attempted stealing – elements: intent and steps in furtherance; supervisory authority and driver’s conduct. * Evidence – credibility of prosecution witnesses and inferences from conduct and statements. * Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act application where property belongs to specified authority and value threshold met.
|
26 October 1986 |
| September 1986 |
|
|
Convictions for forgery and conspiracy quashed for lack of evidence and misappreciation of testimony.
Criminal law — Forgery and conspiracy to defraud — insufficiency of evidence; responsibility for payrolls lies with foremen and accounts/pre‑audit staff; appellate intervention where trial magistrate fails to properly analyse evidence and relies on extra‑judicial statements.
|
27 September 1986 |
|
Appeal allowed: convictions for forgery and conspiracy quashed for insufficient and improperly evaluated evidence.
Criminal law – Forgery and conspiracy – Sufficiency of evidence – Trial magistrate’s duty to analyse evidence – Weight to be accorded to out‑of‑court statements – Responsibility of supervisory officer for payments authorised but prepared and certified by subordinates.
|
27 September 1986 |
|
Confession corroborated by repayment and evidence of conversion supported conviction for stealing by agent; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – stealing by agent – receipt of funds, failure to deliver or account, and conversion to own use as evidence of offence.
* Evidence – confession – voluntariness and corroboration by subsequent conduct (partial repayment).
* Appeal – sufficiency of evidence to sustain conviction despite absence of direct proof of banking or loss.
|
15 September 1986 |
| August 1986 |
|
|
Trial misdirection on alibi did not vitiate conviction due to overwhelming, reliable identification evidence.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – alibi defence – no burden on accused to prove alibi – trial misdirection – identification evidence and daylight identification – appellate review of misdirection where prosecution evidence overwhelming.
|
18 August 1986 |
|
Conviction based on doubtful identification is unsafe where the record lacks time, method and prior-acquaintance evidence.
* Criminal law – Robbery – Conviction based on identification evidence – Necessity to prove time and conditions affecting identification; prior acquaintance and method of identification relevant to reliability. * Criminal procedure – Dock identification – Potential unreliability absent identification parade or corroboration. * Appeal – Conviction unsafe where identification evidence is vague or unsupported.
|
14 August 1986 |
| July 1986 |
|
|
Appeal against conviction and sentence for burglary and stealing dismissed; evidence compelling and sentence properly imposed.
Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – Conviction upheld where accused found in possession of recently stolen goods, seen hiding property, fled and confessed; sentencing – appellate interference refused where trial magistrate properly exercised discretion and sentence justified by value of stolen property.
|
24 July 1986 |
|
Conviction for theft of entrusted salary upheld on circumstantial and credibility-based evidence; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Theft by public officer – Salary entrusted for banking – Circumstantial and testimonial proof – Credibility of prosecution witnesses – Absence of documentary receipt does not necessarily defeat conviction; concurrent sentencing.
|
24 July 1986 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution failed to identify goods as stolen and improperly shifted burden of proof to appellants.
Criminal law – Theft and receiving stolen property – Identification of stolen goods – Mass-produced, unmarked items not sufficient to prove provenance; burden of proof remains on prosecution – Improper reversal of burden by trial court.
|
24 July 1986 |
Election petition - Burden of Proof- Allegation that the victor is not a citizen of Tanzania - Burden of proving citizenship of victor. Evidence - Burden of Proof - Citizenship challenged - The one challenging has the burden of proof |
24 July 1986 |
|
Positive identification of a marked item and recent possession without explanation upheld the conviction; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Identification of stolen property – Positive identification of a specially marked item can suffice to connect recovered goods to a theft; * Criminal law – Recent possession – Possession shortly after theft, without satisfactory explanation, supports conviction; * Evidence – Accused’s inconsistent ownership claims undermining credibility.
|
23 July 1986 |
|
Applicant's appeals dismissed: identification by known witnesses proved theft and five-year sentence upheld.
* Criminal law – Theft under section 265 Penal Code – conviction upheld; * Identification evidence – reliability of identification by known witnesses; * Credibility findings – weight of attendant and victim's son testimony; * Sentence – appeal against five-year imprisonment dismissed.
|
22 July 1986 |
|
Conviction quashed for procedural non‑compliance with s.196(1)(a); retrial ordered because the offence was serious and prevalent.
Criminal procedure – trial by two magistrates – non-compliance with s.196(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code – conviction and sentence quashed; retrial ordered due to seriousness of offence.
|
21 July 1986 |
|
A conviction based solely on an uncorroborated confession by a co-accused cannot be sustained under s.33(2) Evidence Act.
* Criminal law – Evidence – Confession/admission of an accomplice – Necessity of corroboration – s.33(2) Evidence Act 1967 – Uncorroborated accomplice evidence insufficient to sustain conviction.
|
21 July 1986 |
|
Conviction upheld on recent possession and identification; three-year sentence increased to mandatory five years under Minimum Sentences Act.
* Criminal law – housebreaking and stealing – doctrine of recent possession – identification by distinctive marks – credibility of accused’s market-purchase defence. * Evidence – failure to call corroborating witness and discrediting of defence witness. * Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act s.5(d) – mandatory minimum sentence where value of stolen property exceeds statutory threshold – substitution of illegal sentence.
|
21 July 1986 |
|
Court finds a school donation was non-corrupt, dismisses petition and upholds respondent’s election.
Electoral law — Election petition — Alleged pre-election gift to school — distinction between charitable contribution and electoral bribery; witness credibility; burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt. — Alleged third‑party intimidation — hearsay and insufficient proof. — Use of Presidential photograph to indicate ballot position not a prohibited symbol or contravention of Elections Act. — Fairness of party campaign organisation.
|
18 July 1986 |
|
Court dismissed election petition: donation to school was bona fide for sports, no corrupt electioneering or proven voter intimidation; respondent duly elected.
Election law – election petition – alleged corrupt gift to school; timing and motive of donation; standard of proof for corrupt electioneering; allegations of voter intimidation and private prosecutions; use of presidential photograph as reference on ballot paper; fairness of party campaign supervision.
|
18 July 1986 |
|
Planting permanent crops on another’s land does not confer ownership; claimants may recover compensation for their labour.
* Land law – permanent crops – planting of cashew trees on another's shamba does not vest ownership in the planter; entitlement limited to compensation for labour. * Appellate review – duty to analyse trial evidence – appellate court’s failure to address key factual and legal issues warrants quashing of its judgment. * Remedies – compensation for cultivation on land owned by another.
|
8 July 1986 |
Commercial Law - Insurance - Causing a motor vehicle to be used on a road without a certificate of insurance - Motor Vehicle Insurance Ordinance, Cap. 169, s.4(l).
Commercial Law - Transport licensing - Using a goods vehicle without transport licence - Transport Licensing Act, 1973, s.!0(I)(a)(2) and (7).
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Sentencing - Previous High Court judgment misinterpreted - Magistrate imposing sentences which do not reflect the seriousness of the offences - Accused not disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence as required by the law.
Commercial Law - Insurance - Causing a motor vehicle to be used on a road without a certificate of insurance - Motor Vehicle Insurance Ordinance, Cap. 169, s.4(l).
Commercial Law - Transport licensing - Using a goods vehicle without transport licence - Transport Licensing Act, 1973, s.!0(I)(a)(2) and (7).
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Sentencing - Previous High Court judgment misinterpreted - Magistrate imposing sentences which do not reflect the seriousness of the offences - Accused not disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence as required by the law. |
8 July 1986 |
|
The plaintiff was awarded the value of sand taken after the court found the plaintiff owned the disputed land, rejecting the defendant’s village-permission defence.
* Property — ownership dispute between individual and Ujamaa village — admissibility and weight of oral and documentary evidence; * Civil remedy — claim for value of goods taken from disputed land; * Evidentiary weight — role of Ministry of Lands’ interpretation in land ownership disputes.
|
2 July 1986 |
|
Appeal dismissed: lower court correctly found plaintiff’s ownership of land; village permission did not justify removal of sand.
Property – land ownership – contested title between private plaintiff and Ujamaa village – weight of oral testimony and documentary title evidence (including Ministry of Lands interpretation) – removal of natural resources from land without owner’s title.
|
2 July 1986 |
|
Appeal dismissed: court upheld finding respondent was an employee and was underpaid below the statutory minimum.
Employment law – proof of employment – credibility of documentary and testimonial evidence (identity card and attendance) – statutory minimum wage – appellate review of findings of fact and credibility.
|
2 July 1986 |
|
Where parties are in fact divorced, a Primary Court may validly divide matrimonial assets despite no formal divorce decree.
Matrimonial property — Division of assets by Primary Court — Effect of absence of formal divorce decree on competence to divide matrimonial assets — Appellate review where factual record shows parties divorced — Upholding Primary Court findings where valuation and reasons are adequate.
|
2 July 1986 |
| June 1986 |
|
|
Reported
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Sentencing - Sentence breaches statutory provision - Effect. |
27 June 1986 |
|
Conviction for goat theft upheld; sentence reduced from six to five years due to mitigation.
* Criminal law – Theft – Whether possession and conduct following an alarm constituted sufficient proof of theft; credibility of accused’s claim of purchase. * Sentencing – Whether the six-year sentence was excessive given first offender status and recovery of property; reduction to statutory minimum.
|
20 June 1986 |
|
Possession of recently stolen property plus corroborating eyewitnesses justified conviction; 12‑month sentence upheld.
* Criminal law – Theft – Possession of recently stolen property as strong circumstantial evidence of theft – conduct of accused (wearing items, fleeing, discarding exhibit) bolstering inference of guilt.
* Evidence – Credibility and corroboration – Eyewitness identification and consistent accounts support conviction.
* Sentencing – Trial court’s sentence of twelve months upheld as not excessive.
|
18 June 1986 |
| January 1986 |
|
|
Appeal allowed; convictions for obtaining goods by false pretences quashed due to inadequate evidence and missing material witness.
Criminal law – Obtaining goods by false pretences (s.302 Penal Code) – Proof requires direct evidence from the person to whom the false representation was made – Failure to call material witness renders allegation hearsay and convictions unsafe.
|
28 January 1986 |