the offence of robbery, and sentenced to seven (7) and fifteen (15) years imprisonment, respectively.1 8. On 27 October 2006, the Applicant filed Criminal Appeal No, 58/2006 against the sentence before the High Court of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam. 9. On 20 March 2017, the Court quashed the Applicant's conviction and set aside part of the unserved sentence on the grounds that the records of his case file were lost and that the Applicant had served a substantial part of his sentence. The High Court also ordered the Applicant to be set free forthwith unless lawfully held for another matter. However, the Applicant remained in prison serving his thirty (30) years sentence for the conviction of armed robbery in the first case. B. Alleged violations 10. The Applicant alleges as follows: i, Although the prosecution called eight (8) prosecution witnesses in Criminal Case No. 95/2003, the District Magistrate Court and the Court of Appeal relied on the visual identification of PW2 and PW3 to convict him without following due process, thus violating his rights under Article 13(1) of the 1977 Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. li. The District Magistrate Court grossly violated his rights when it admitted prosecution exhibits (1-5) without considering his submissions regarding their admissibility, thus contravening his basic rights under Article 26(1) and (2) of the Respondent State’s Constitution. The Applicant states that the Court of Appeal also failed to consider these violations when it upheld his conviction and sentence. ‘The judgment in this case does not appear on the record. However, in its judgment of 20 March 2017, the High Court indicated that the sentence handed down in this matter was twenty-two (22) years in prison: seven (7) years for conspiracy to commit a felony and fifteen (15) years for robbery; p. 2, lines 5 and 6.