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[1990] TZHC 296Tanzania

Peter John vs Republic (HC Criminal Appeal No. 175 of 1990) [1990] TZHC 296 (17 October 1990)

High Court of Tanzania

Judgment

~ --· IN THE HIGH COURT.OF TANZANIA ,,l.:;·••·; 1' ••... •' -· .:· ·t··I: -:t~ ··j,t :lfi~,,.·r:t ;,._,j:jt,::•,:.i•--:w •:·;.t • r.r;)frti:JimdsttA''.· _;.{.. """ _, ... , ....... . : ' i ... · . APPELLATE JURifiliICTION ,.. _· ----- . _, ____ _ . , ... ; -- ,. .. · ,:,(, {'.i•:·, ;·: _ _i.,·.;·.,fHIGl-t R1'' CRIMINAL APPt:;"At;·tC:., .. ·.'7 ·oF '.1990 (Original: Criminal. Case No. 49 of i990 ·ot the o.fs":::-ict r- .':., •• , ... ,SP5-; h~~.~~ti_.Dist,t:ict at,;B.13¥:.:-.:.efote: Po·Eo P. Mlay - ' ,.., ....... :"' 1 Se111or lh.st:rict_.Magistrate) · . • . . ;t·· ;~~-t-r..' ·:.-· . ·: · .. , ,,.:·:·t ... /r·!·':: · -. ·•tJiJ·t r- .. ·,..f; .. ;.•·I,•;.•··::~ .. . ': .. ::·; :t,.·j. . ('•' ... - •.'. . ' ?E1!::R J'.OI-l:N ·'.';'_•'!;ho},)'.':'·.--.; 0 0 0 .•·.'?. ':. .;__''. •·;•. •,.• -:·.· 0 0 e ... •. • .. • o, .. --/. APPELLANT . '·" i ,,· • ><· '. .. :.. V ;,_4,, f{,::·:,. . ! :!;.!, ,,.,J.:. ,r;J. · ". ·•(o· L.(!g•.:... ... , Ar'"'l"' ed ) ...... ., '" •·• "•·• .,. .· \ · .· r.J... ...1,,.L.;.... ,-'-' - . . . . - : .. ,.' ;,. · ' . . ; ;jJ<•;::··:, __ '··;(;,.~~: ··,: ;• :; :; >::··:·-:.::~~~~~-; ·.:::' :;-' .. ,-'.-.,., .... :·.:: . ~ . . ,· .: ;.;, THc. :,Ri:.l?Uatil:c .• io o'-a·o e • Go"• •• O ·o • O i> •·o o. 0 d • 0 o' 0 O • o o .... o O o • O e RESPONDENT • -. <;-,.-· . ,,:, : ·; ... _-. ;i(o.d .. ginal J?ro:S··cut-or} . . . .· .. ~::l. ·:., ·.

  • . . ..... .:..I ,:'J ••.• JUOGr-{ENT MROSO, J. · ........,,_.------- • ,, ••! 11-•· :. . ' ' Te:: c:ir,pl!.ctA't w.as convicted by the D5.stri".'.:t Court of Babati . ' for theft of a mc>tor vehicle jack and was :sentenced to five years imprisonment.- .. He has sought to challenge the propti'ety of the conviction and sentence by filing th,e appeal to this ·court. A jack was found missing from a village track. A week later one Edward JoSeph allegedly reported that the appellant had· approuched him to tell him that he was s·elling the jack for shillings 5 1 000/=. The village sec·retary, one Sylas Wema (P .. W.2) asked E<h'1ard to p\lrt:ha~a the j.ack as a way of getting the appellant arrested• Later Edward came with the jack, claiming he had bought it from the appellant., The appellant was subsequently arrs:::stcd and made a confession t which he retracted during the trial, that he had stolen the jack~ During his defence on oath he said he.made the confession as a result of a beating he got when he was taken by the arresting militia people to the village office,. Now, Edward Joseph who allegedly got the jack from the appe11\nt did not testify at the trial. so, the evidence that . . the jack was found with the appellant was inarlmisible hearsay. There remained against the appellant the r.etracted confesslon which, as a matter of prudence; needed corroboration. There was no corroboration f:or: that confession, which could have been readily available had the prosecution called Edward to testify

•' L out fo~. ne*pliable ·reas·ons:/ the_:.roseeution thought it fit .• • • t _ ••• to leove ou-t Edward r_ .>. .... ·. ·· ' ., , . _ ·\ _· This is not a fit case in \ilhih-· a ~~~~ic:tin can ·be . . . . . ~ . . . . .. based solcl,y' on the retracted·- confession. ·. ·;,: . ·: . The R.epub.lic did not· seek to support the conviction. · ...... ··' , ; ... I. am no·l: surprised. Since ·the convation of t.e appellant was J:>nsccl. mai.n.i°y on i.ndmiss'ible· 'he·arsay evide-,M~ and .on uocorroborc.'tacl .J:,,8Uaetad eonr-es.sion,. tha conviction..CQ11n.ot stand• I therefc;;re, quashi:::d the conviction and set aside the sentence when I heard this il°ppeal two days ago·. I • • • I • ,:e,Se,rV\iQ my r,e~ which ~ fl&V~ a.tt.em.ptad t.o ,giV>(,j, ,al)QYe,. At Arusha, 17-/10/90 ·:_ t~ .. /.· 'i"iroso > JUDGE ·., ... :,. "li:~ .-· , . -~~ .... ·..-- . .Hi:. o.c-. $.' At~.M,o,y· .-: . presenj;.._. ·. :, . :. ', ) .':. :, . . .. . . . j: i:. : .. - ··!1~: ~ ::· ... ·-!•·<;G --t·:.G..[_:·: ... :·;:

  • ..•• , !. , • ,.1 .. • •• ·/'., . : .. : .' . ·. :, ,• . . .. . . . . . . :_ ~ ' :; . ';'.I .. ..... .. . . .

1111111111

Discussion