africa.lawBeta
SearchAsk AICollectionsJudgesCompareMemo
africa.law

Free access to African legal information. Legislation, case law, and regulatory documents from across the continent.

Resources

  • Legislation
  • Gazettes
  • Jurisdictions

Developers

  • API Documentation
  • Bulk Downloads
  • Data Sources
  • GitHub

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

Jurisdictions

  • All jurisdictions →

© 2026 africa.law by Bhala. Open legal information for Africa.

Aggregating legal information from official government publications and public legal databases across the continent.

Back to search
Case Law[1977] TZHC 525Tanzania

Said Ramadhan Chaptani vs Republic (High Court Criminal Appeal No. 95 of 1977) [1977] TZHC 525 (30 December 1977)

High Court of Tanzania

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT D.AR E. SALAM I) APPELLATE JURISDICTION HIGH COURT CRIMIAL APPEAL N04 95 OF 1977 ORIGINAL CRIMINAL CASE NGe 44 OF 1976 OF THE , DISTRICT COURT OF ULANGA DISTRICT AT MAHENGE Before J. M. NYAMBOGA Esg, District Magistrate. SAID RAMADHAN CHAPTANI : Appellant (Original Accused) Versus • : THE REPUBLIC Respondent (Original Prosedutor.) Charge.: Shop breaking and.tealiiig c/s 296 and 265 of the Penal Code Cap16 Vo141 of the Revised Lws. J.UDG . E,ME:..NT OF , KIMICHA,.. J. The Appellant in this case was óonvicted of shop breaking and stealing c/s 296 of the Penal Code and sentenced to 5 yare imprisonment. He has now appealed against sentence and conviction. Briefly the facts of the case as found by the trial ôoürt are that the UWTa.shop at Mahenge was broken into on 12/7/76 and clothing material valued at Shs.7,010/70 stoln. The Appellant and his co—accused in the 1wer court (Acused 2 who has not apealed) were found on 13/7/76 with the stolen property valued at Sh8.1,558/]M. The Appellant elected to keep quIet in his defence. - The trial court being stisfjed that the property was prOperly identified by the complainants convicted the Appellant and his a o- accused. After reading the record and considering the Appe1lànts memorandum of appeal, I am satisfied that there was sufficient evidence before the lower court justifying the Appel1ahts conviction. The Appellant had a record of previous convictions and his sentence is the minimum prescribed by law for his offence. His appeal is therefore dismissed in its entirety0 F] Delivered in open Court this 7 1 ( M. P. KIMICHA ) JUUGE 23/12/77 30th day of December, 1977. 4 / ( M.KIMICHA ) JUDGE 30/12/77

Discussion