|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| April 2022 |
|
|
The applicant was permitted to withhold witnesses' identities and related statements to protect witness safety during committal and trial.
Criminal procedure – committal proceedings – disclosure of prosecution evidence – balancing disclosure against witness safety under s.34(3) Prevention of Terrorism Act and s.188(1) Criminal Procedure Act; witness protection – non-disclosure of identities and statements; video conferencing – may be ordered but not at committal stage.
|
27 April 2022 |
|
Court ordered withholding and redaction of prosecution witness identities, prohibited dissemination; trial modality issues reserved.
Criminal procedure – witness protection – Court ordered withholding of witness identities and whereabouts during committal and trial. Evidence disclosure – redaction of witness statements and non-disclosure to accused/defence counsel; alternative of providing non-identifying comprehensive summaries. Publication restraint – prohibition on dissemination of materials revealing witness identity or location. Trial modality – request for video-conference or in camera trial declined at this stage
|
21 April 2022 |
| March 2022 |
|
|
|
31 March 2022 |
|
|
29 March 2022 |
|
High Court may not exercise section 372 CPA powers to intervene in subordinate court proceedings before committal.
Criminal procedure — High Court supervisory powers — Section 372 Criminal Procedure Act — Scope limited by requirement of committal order — No jurisdiction to intervene pre-committal — Precedent: DPP v Bookeem; Republic v Dodoli Kapufi; Farid Hadi Ahmed.
|
22 March 2022 |
|
|
1 March 2022 |
|
|
1 March 2022 |
| February 2022 |
|
|
|
28 February 2022 |
|
|
28 February 2022 |
| January 2022 |
|
|
Court granted the applicant's request to withhold prosecution witnesses' identities and statements to protect their security.
Witness protection – statutory authority under section 188 Criminal Procedure Act and section 34(3) Prevention of Terrorism Act Non-disclosure – withholding of witness identities, whereabouts and statements/documents likely to identify witnesses during committal and trial Balancing rights – protecting witness security while preserving accused’s right to a fair trial through screening or provision of comprehensive summaries Procedural relief – ex parte application to the DPP and discretionary refusal of video-conferencing order at committal stage
|
21 January 2022 |
|
Prosecution failed to prove trafficking beyond reasonable doubt due to contradictions in seizure evidence and exhibit identification.
Drug trafficking — proof beyond reasonable doubt — search and seizure — witness contradictions — exhibit identification and chain of custody — burden under s.28(1) Drug Act — forfeiture of exhibits.
|
20 January 2022 |
|
Court rejected seized exhibits due to failure to issue seizure receipts and to comply with prescribed labelling requirements.
Evidence — admissibility of exhibits — relevance, materiality and competence — authentication by unique feature, made‑unique feature or chain of custody; chain of custody may be established orally depending on circumstances; non‑compliance with labelling and seizure‑receipt requirements (PGO/CPA/EOCCA/Guidelines) may be fatal to admissibility; factual disputes over identification/ownership go to weight not admissibility.
|
10 January 2022 |
| December 2021 |
|
|
Court admitted first page of seizure certificate but expunged unsigned second page for lack of required signatures.
Evidence — Seizure certificate — Admissibility — Wrong citation of statute not fatal unless prejudice shown; goes to weight
Procedure — Emergency search (s.42 CPA) vs ordinary search (s.38 CPA) — mis-citation curable where procedure followed conforms to law
Evidence — Chain of custody — identification by author and unique features can suffice at admissibility stage; gaps may be filled later. Police procedure — PGO 226 — seizure report must list items and be signed by officer, occupier and witnesses; unsigned continuation may be expunged
|
17 December 2021 |
|
Court overruled objections and admitted the 3rd accused’s cautioned statement as voluntary and admissible.
Evidence — cautioned statement — voluntariness; Criminal Procedure Act s.50(1)(a) and s.50(2) — delay and exceptions; admissibility — formal defects (wrong verification citation, omission of subsection, s.57/s.58 citation) — curable if no prejudice; proof of detention — role of detention register and witness credibility; trial‑within‑trial procedure under Evidence Act s.27(2).
|
14 December 2021 |
|
Accused acquitted because valuation, search and seizure, and chain of custody were defective.
Criminal law – unlawful possession and dealing in government trophies – burden to prove particulars including equivalence and valuation of tusks
Evidence – valuation evidence and exchange rate must be substantiated. Search and seizure – correct statutory basis (section 38 vs 42 CPA), authenticity of certificate of seizure and contradictions undermine admissibility. Chain of custody – broken where search/seizure procedures are defective
Confession – extra-judicial statement must contain admissions of essential ingredients to be admissible
|
1 December 2021 |
| November 2021 |
|
|
Retendering a formerly identified but rejected document is permitted; functus officio, issue estoppel, and disposal order objections overruled.
Criminal procedure – admissibility of exhibits – trial‑within‑trial – identification v. tendering as exhibit – functus officio – issue estoppel – section 353(3) CPA and Exhibit Management Guideline – chain of custody – administrative release by court registry.
|
22 November 2021 |
|
Whether a copied prosecutorial letter is admissible and whether a police witness can tender it without dispatch proof.
Evidence — Documentary evidence — Authentication by unique features and chain of custody — Identification of witness’s name and force number as unique features
Evidence — Competence of witness to tender exhibits — Oral possession and recognition may suffice absent disproof
Evidence — Chain of custody — Paper trail not mandatory where limited handling and credible oral account exist
Evidence — Use of document contents during admission — Content may be referred to for testing competence though full reading awaits admission
|
15 November 2021 |
|
Wrong citation on a seizure form does not invalidate it unless the accused shows actual prejudice.
Evidence — Search and seizure — Admissibility of statutory seizure certificate — Effect of wrong citation of enabling provision — overriding objective and prejudice test. Statutory interpretation — Meaning of Swahili phrase "iliyorekebishwa" — construed as "as amended." Criminal procedure — Difference between defects in motion documents and evidentiary documents — chain of custody and prevention of fabrication
|
9 November 2021 |
|
Second appeal dismissed: new factual grounds cannot be raised and appellant failed to prove ownership.
Civil appeals – second appeal – new factual grounds not raised in lower courts – inadmissible on appeal
Evidence – documentary evidence – weight of sale agreement versus pension payment documents. Burden of proof – party alleging ownership must prove it. Appellate review – no interference absent extraordinary circumstances
|
4 November 2021 |
| October 2021 |
|
|
|
29 October 2021 |
|
|
27 October 2021 |
|
Whether a cautioned statement recorded after delay was admissible given investigative travel and allegations of torture.
Criminal procedure — Admissibility of cautioned/confession statement — s.50(1)(a), s.50(2) exception for time spent on investigative activity and conveyance — s.51 inapplicable where no prior interview began; voluntariness and torture allegations — trial-within-trial on admissibility.
|
20 October 2021 |
| September 2021 |
|
|
Extension of time denied where applicant failed to account for delay and alleged illegality was not established.
Land appeal — extension of time to appeal; requirements under Lyamuya (account for delay, absence of inordinate delay, diligence, or sufficient reasons such as established illegality); overriding objective principle — cannot cure mandatory procedural defects affecting tribunal composition and right to be heard.
|
30 September 2021 |
|
|
24 September 2021 |
|
Prosecution’s circumstantial and electronic evidence was unreliable; case dismissed and the accused acquitted.
Criminal law – Organized crime and theft charges arising from a train accident; circumstantial evidence must be watertight; chain of custody and proper seizure of exhibits essential; cyber‑forensic evidence must be authenticated (hash values, reliable timestamps); cautioned statements and altered documents may be unreliable without proper explanation; expert evidence (mechanical/engineering) necessary to resolve technical causation issues.
|
21 September 2021 |
|
Counts under section 4(3)(i)(i) must expressly plead acts were made for the purpose of advancing or supporting terrorism; defective counts must be amended.
Criminal procedure – preliminary objections – sufficiency and form of charge sheet in terrorism cases; requirement to plead purpose under s.4(3)(i)(i) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002. Criminal law – conspiracy vs substantive offences – duplicity/multiplicity and double jeopardy. Statutory construction – 'terrorist intention' and limits of judicial intervention versus parliamentary record (Hansard)
|
6 September 2021 |
|
The Corruption and Economic Crimes Division has jurisdiction to try terrorism offences after purposive reading of amendments classifying them as economic offences.
Jurisdiction – Corruption and Economic Crimes Division – whether it may try offences under the Prevention of Terrorism Act after Act No. 3 of 2016 amended Cap 200 (paragraph 24). Statutory interpretation – purposive construction and doctrine against absurdity where two statutes appear to confer jurisdiction
Exclusivity – absence of express exclusivity means concurrent jurisdiction may exist; unamended provisions do not necessarily oust Division's jurisdiction
|
1 September 2021 |
| August 2021 |
|
|
Applicant’s satisfactory explanation for non‑appearance justified setting aside dismissal and restoring the appeal with no costs.
Civil Procedure — setting aside dismissal for want of prosecution — Order XXXIX r.19 CPC; sufficiency of reasons for non‑appearance; conduct before dismissal; registry communication failures; interest of justice; no prejudice to respondent.
|
31 August 2021 |
|
Unproven illness and unexplained 46-day delay precluded extension of time to appeal; application dismissed with costs.
Extension of time – sufficient cause – need to account for every day of delay; medical evidence – adequacy of medical letter, need for corroborating documents; pleadings and evidence – submissions not substitute for affidavit; old age not per se sufficient ground for extension.
|
16 August 2021 |
| July 2021 |
|
|
Appellant failed to prove prior mortgage or title; mortgagee lawfully auctioned the encumbered property; appeal dismissed.
Land law – mortgage – validity of mortgage and priority; capacity to pass title while property encumbered; auction by mortgagee under section 126(d) Land Act; burden of proof – section 110 Evidence Act; appellate interference with tribunal findings; evidential weight – Hemedi Said v Mohamedi Mbilu.
|
30 July 2021 |
|
Prosecution failed to prove drug charges due to broken chain of custody and a defective cautioned statement.
Criminal law – Drugs – Trafficking and possession – requirement to prove chain of custody from seizure to laboratory analysis – unexplained delay and missing handing-over documentation undermining admissibility and reliability of exhibits. Criminal procedure – Cautioned statement – statutory requirements for reading, certification and timing – non-compliance renders statement unreliable
|
27 July 2021 |
|
An application to restore a dismissed suit filed after the court-ordered deadline without leave was time-barred and dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure – Restoration of dismissed suit – Compliance with court-ordered deadline – Filing after court-imposed date without leave is incompetent and time-barred. Court orders – Time limits fixed by court – Parties must obey orders to ensure efficient administration of justice. Preliminary objection – Time bar – Dismissal with costs where application filed out of time and without leave
|
13 July 2021 |
|
Land claim dismissed as time‑barred: cause of action accrued in 2003; 12‑year limitation expired before suit.
Limitation of actions – Land – Item 22 Part I Schedule to the Law of Limitation Act – 12‑year period for recovery of land – accrual of cause of action determined by pleadings and annexures
Pleadings – plaint read with annexures to ascertain when plaintiff became aware of dispute. Revocation of right of occupancy – effect on third parties and need to prove title against grantee before pursuit of claim against State
|
6 July 2021 |
| June 2021 |
|
|
First accused convicted for unlawful possession of elephant tusks; second acquitted; tusks forfeited; 20-year sentence.
Wildlife offences – unlawful possession of government trophy – identification and valuation of elephant tusks – evidential value of expert identification and valuation certificate
Possession – actual versus constructive possession – signing of certificate of seizure as acknowledgement of possession. Chain of custody – exhibits not easily tampered with (elephant tusks) – oral testimony sufficient to establish continuity. Procedural defence requirements – alibi particulars under section 42 EOCCA; shifted burden to prove lawful possession under section 100(3)(a) of the Wildlife Conservation Act. Acquittal where no evidence links accused to alleged exhibit transfer or control
|
17 June 2021 |
| April 2021 |
|
|
Accused acquitted where prosecution failed to prove possession and maintain an unbroken chain of custody for narcotics.
Criminal law – Drug offences – Trafficking – Possession; Evidence – Burden of proof in criminal cases; Chain of custody – documentation and handling of narcotic exhibits; Failure to call material independent witness – adverse inference; Improper/disputed disposal and delay before laboratory analysis.
|
30 April 2021 |
|
Accused convicted of trafficking 327.56 kg cannabis; forensic proof and chain of custody upheld, each sentenced to 30 years.
Criminal law – Narcotic drugs – Trafficking in cannabis sativa (327.56 kg) – Proof beyond reasonable doubt; forensic analysis confirming nature of substance
Evidence – Chain of custody – exhibit register and submission forms established continuity of custody
Procedure – Arrest and seizure – lawful though formal seizure recorded at police station due to unsafe scene. Defence credibility – alibi of looking for plots and allegations of coercion unsubstantiated and rejected
Sentence – 30 years imprisonment each; exhibits destroyed; vehicle dealt with under relevant rules
|
16 April 2021 |
| March 2021 |
|
|
Court convicted the accused of heroin trafficking, upheld searches and chain of custody, imposed life sentences, destroyed drugs and confiscated the vehicle.
Criminal law – Narcotic drugs – Trafficking in heroin hydrochloride – Proof of recovery and identification of exhibits – admissibility and sufficiency of chemist's analysis
Evidence – Search and seizure – credibility of police and independent witness testimony; allegations of planting require particularisation
Evidence – Chain of custody – absence of paper trail does not necessarily break chain where oral custody evidence is credible. Confiscation and disposal – Court power to order destruction of narcotics and confiscate instrumentality of offence despite an intended appeal
Sentencing – Statutory life sentence for trafficking offences; limited or no discretion for leniency in such offences
|
31 March 2021 |
| February 2021 |
|
|
An extension application was dismissed as res judicata because a competent High Court registry had already decided the same matter.
Civil procedure – res judicata – application for extension of time – identical application previously heard and decided by same court registry precludes relitigation.* Procedural remedy – certificate of delay; registrar assistance and referral to legal aid.
|
19 February 2021 |
| December 2020 |
|
|
|
18 December 2020 |
|
|
15 December 2020 |
|
|
8 December 2020 |
|
Unreliable identification and lack of corroboration raised reasonable doubt, resulting in acquittal on wildlife poaching charges.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – observations made at 100m amid shrubs and trees; contradictions in witness descriptions render identification unsafe and require caution
Evidence – Corroboration – where identification is weak, corroborative evidence is necessary to sustain conviction
Defence – Alibi – properly raised alibi, supported by witnesses and documents, can create reasonable doubt. Wildlife law – Prosecution must prove unlawful hunting and dealing beyond reasonable doubt; seized exhibits may be confiscated under s.101 Wildlife Conservation Act
|
3 December 2020 |
| November 2020 |
|
|
|
20 November 2020 |
|
|
16 November 2020 |
|
|
16 November 2020 |
|
Possession of an elephant tusk was proved, chain of custody upheld, alibi rejected; convicted, sentenced to 20 years and tusk forfeited.
Wildlife offences – unlawful possession of government trophy (elephant tusk); evidentiary proof of possession; chain of custody requirements and admissibility; late alibi and statutory notice under economic offences statutes; sentencing and forfeiture under Wildlife Conservation Act and Economic and Organized Crime Control Act.
|
13 November 2020 |
|
|
10 November 2020 |
|
|
6 November 2020 |
| September 2020 |
|
|
Accused convicted of unlawful possession of heroin hydrochloride; chain of custody upheld despite detention irregularities.
Drug offences – identity of substance – heroin hydrochloride confirmed by Government Chemist as narcotic drug; section 15(2) covers substances with drug effects not expressly listed. Search and seizure – seizure certificate and independent witness statement corroborate retrieval from accused. Chain of custody – oral testimony and exhibit markings upheld continuity despite documentary gaps. Procedural irregularity – detention beyond 48 hours noted but did not vitiate admissible evidence. Conviction on alternative count of unlawful possession; sentence imposed
|
18 September 2020 |
|
|
8 September 2020 |