regarding this allegation. Section 226(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that: "If at the time or place to which the hearing or further hearing is adjourned, the accused person does not appear before the court in which the order of adjournment was made, it shall be lawful for the court to proceed with the hearing or further hearing as if the accused were present; and if the complainant does not appear, the court may dismiss the charge and acquit the accused with or without costs as the court thinks fit." 83. In the Respondent's written submissions to the High Court at Moshi, in respect of Criminal Appeal Number 82 of 1998, the Respondent conceded that, if the record does not show compliance with Section 226(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which requires that even after being tried in absentia, the Applicant (who was the Appellant in that Appeal) should have been allowed an opportunity to provide the Court with reasons for his absence, then the Applicant should be granted this opportunity. 84. The Respondent's submission before this Court on this issue is to maintain that the Applicant was absent during the defence case at the trial court and that Section 226(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was properly applied in proceeding with the trial. 85. It is also the Applicant's allegation that the court did not admit his rejoinder in the appeal before the High Court. The Respondent's position is that it denies these allegations and the Applicant is put to strict proof thereof. \ 35 . ·