Omary Said @ Habibu and Another versus The Republic; Criminal Appeal No 302 of 2014:Court of Appeal of Tanzania at Arusha (Unreported).
- Evidence
- Burden of Proof – whose burden of proof in criminal cases?
- Identification – visual identification- under what circumstances it may be relied upon.
- Criminal Procedure
- Cautioned statement – statement recorded after expiry of time – Effect.
Held:-
(i) The evidence of visual identification is one of the weakest kinds and should only be relied upon when all possibilities of mistaken identity are eliminated and the court is satisfied that the evidence before it is absolutely water tight.
(ii) The period available for interviewing an accused person is four hours commencing at the time when he is placed under restraint – by the police. Unless the period is extended by the relevant authority, the omission renders the statement a nullity.
(iii) Provisions of section 50 and 51 of the Criminal Procedure Act were meant to safeguard the human right of suspects and should therefore not to be taken lightly or as mere technicalities”.
(iv) The law is settled that non-compliance with the provisions of section 50 and 51 of the Criminal Procedure Act is a fundamental irregularity that goes to the root of the matter and renders the illegally obtained evidence inadmissible and cannot be acted upon by the court.
(v) It is the principle of l aw that in all criminal cases, the burden of proof rests upon the prosecution to prove the charge against the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. The burden never shifts to the accused. What the accused has to do is to raise a doubt on the prosecution case.