On 17th April, 2008 at Rukwa Lukwati Forest Reserve within Mpanda District the accused person was arraigned and found in unlawful possession of government trophies. Then brought before the court to answer a charge. The accused was convicted.
On 21st January 2014, the accused person at Orkemeset area Simanjiro District in Manyara region was unlawful found in possession of the government trophy. The accused person was selling the wildlife meat to some other people. The accused was found guilty of the offences charged.
On 9th October, 2013 at Mnyamasi area at Vikonge village within Mpanda District in Katavi Region, the accused person was arraigned and found in unlawful possession of government trophy. He was therefore charged with an economic crime and wildlife conservation. The accused was convicted.
On 10th October, 2013 at Muze village within Mlele District in Katavi region the accused person was arraigned and found in unlawful possession of government trophies. A charge was brought before the court for accused person to answer. The accused was acquitted.
The 1st accused person (a game reserve officer) and other two persons were arrested on 7th day of April, 2007 at Makuyuni within Monduli District in Arusha region with a government trophy to wit, one eland meat. The 1st accused claimed that on previously he had received complaints that animals are destroying crops.
That on 9th November, 2014 near the lake shore the accused person was arrested and found in unlawful possessing government trophies. A charge of unlawful possession was brought against the accused person. The accused person was convicted.
On 12.05.2001 at Mirerani village within Simanjiro District in Manyara Region the accused person was found in unlawful possession of government trophy to wit, antelope meat property of the government of Tanzania. The accused person was found not guilty and was therefore acquitted.
The applicant sought an order declaring the respondent’s motor vehicle forfeit to the state following his arrest for illegal poaching. The court dismissed the application on the basis that being motion proceedings, the matter had, there being no request for a referral for oral evidence, to be decided on the respondent’s version.