out as it did not specify the subsection of Section 91 of the Criminal Procedure Act under which it was made and that the Applicant's prayers were stated in the affidavit in support of the application rather than in the Chamber Summons. 60. Again, in 2010, the Applicant filed, in the High Court of Tanzania at Arusha, Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 6 of 2010 in accordance with Section 90 (1) (c) (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act requesting a discontinuance of the Criminal Cases under Section 90(1)(c ) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the actions that the Police had taken were contrary to Sections 32, 33, 50(1), 51(1) and 52(1), (2) and (3) thereof. The application was against the Attorney General of the Respondent. On 16 November 2010, the application was struck out for being incompetent as it was filed under a repealed section of the law, that is Section 90 (1) (c) (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which was repealed by Section 31 of the National Prosecution Act No.27 of 2008 which had come into effect on 9 June 2008. 61. The Applicant also filed. in 2010, in the High Court of Tanzania at Arusha, Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 47 of 2010, originating from the Criminal Cases, against the Respondent. The application was on the basis of Articles 13(1), 15(1), (2) (a) and 30 (3) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania guaranteeing equality before the law and the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of one's freedom. On 14 December 2010, the High Court struck out the application as it was not properly made since it had been filed by way of Chamber Summons and supporting affidavit. According to the High Court, the matter should have been brought in accordance with Section 5 of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act, which sets out the appropriate procedure, namely, that the case be filed by way of a Petition and Originating Summons. In addition. such an application must be determined by a three-Judge Bench and not a single Judge, as was in the instant case. 62 On 8 December 2010, the Applicant filed, in the High Court of Tanzania at Arusha, Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 78 of 2010, originating from the Criminal Cases, against the Attorney General of the Respondent, as First Respondent, and the Police Officer in Charge of Arusha, as Second Respondent, on the basis of Articles 13(1), 15(1), (2) (a) and 30 (3) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. These provisions guarantee equality before the law and the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of one's freedom. In the application, the Applicant alleged violation of his right to freedom and to live as a free person. The Applicant alleged that the Second Respondent had arrested, detained and interrogated him in respect of what would be the Criminal Cases, contrary to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act and that therefore the actions of the Second Respondent in that regard were vitiated by these irregularities. The Applicant sought a decree under Part 111 of Chapter One of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania to this effect. On 18 May 2011, the High Court issued an order that the application was withdrawn at the Applicant's instance. 63. On 29 December 2010, the Applicant filed, in the High Court of Tanzania in Arusha, Miscellaneous Criminal Application No 80 of 2010, alleging violation of his basic rights and freedoms guaranteed under Part 111 of Chapter One of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, specifically of Articles 24(1), (2) and 30(3) thereof on the right to own property. The application was against the Attorney General of the Respondent and the Police Officer in Charge of Arusha. The applicant prayed the Court to order the Respondents in that application to restore his properties and any other relief it deemed fit. On 18 May 2011, the High Court issued an Order that the application was withdrawn at the instance of the Applicant. 64. On 19 May 2011 the Applicant filed, in the High Court of Tanzania at Arusha, Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 16 of 2011, originating from the Criminal Cases, against the Attorney General of the Respondent on the basis of Articles 13(1). 15(1) and 15(2) (a) and 30(3) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. He alleged that the provisions and laws governing his rights under Section 13(1)(a). (b), 13 (3) (a), (b) and (c), 32(1), (2) and (3), 33, 50(1), 52(1) and 52 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Articles 14(1) and 15(1), and 15(2){a) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania were violated by the Police. He sought a decree under Part Ill of Chapter One of the Constrtution. The Respondent in the matter filed the response on 5 October 2011. The Applicant repeatedly urged the empanelling of the threeJudge Bench of the High Court to hear this application. On 29 June 2011, the Applicant wrote to the Judge in Charge of the High Court of Tanzania at Arusha, requesting that the three - Judge Bench be constituted to hear the application. He wrote again in this regard on 14 November 2011 to the District Registrar of the High Court at Arusha. On 26 March 2012. this Application was withdrawn in the absence of the Applicant. The Order. which was filed by the Respondent as an annexure to its Response to the Application, shows that the Applicant was not in Court yet the text of the record shows, that the application was withdrawn at his instance. At the hearing before us, the Respondent sought to introduce another record indicating that 9