Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

The Criminal Division is Responsible for hearing all serious criminal offences referred to it by the Magistrates' Courts. According to the Principal Judge's Circular, except for Commercial Court Judges who must attend to only Commercial Court cases, the rest of the Judges of the High Court who are based in Kampala are members of the Criminal Division irrespective of the other Divisions of the High Court that they belong to.

Each of the above judges is supposed to do, at least, one High Court Criminal Session in a year at Kampala

Physical address
High Court Building at Plot 2, the Square.
Visit website
https://judiciary.go.ug/data/smenu/13/Criminal%20Division.html
8 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
8 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
July 2019
Dr. Stella Nyanzi V Uganda (Criminal Revision No. 024 of 2019) [2019] UGHCCRD 39 (31 July 2019)
Whether the trial magistrate erred in managing defence witnesses, service of summons, and alleged bias.
Criminal procedure – Revision (Judicature Act s.17; CrPC ss.48,50) – Trial management and discretion – Service of witness summons and role of process servers – Right to adequate facilities to prepare defence – Adjournments and closing defence case – Judicial impartiality and alleged bias.
 31 July 2019
Uganda v Nsubuga Ben (Criminal Case No. 98 of 2017) [2019] UGHCCRD 201 (11 July 2019)
Circumstantial evidence and recovery of stolen property established a prima facie case; accused ordered to put on defence.
Criminal procedure – No case to answer – Legal test for prima facie case (Brett v R) – Circumstantial evidence – Recovery of stolen property identified by chassis/engine numbers despite forged logbook – Chain of sale linking accused – Accused to be called to put on defence.
 11 July 2019
Uganda v Obong Tom (Criminal Case No. 124 of 2019) [2019] UGHCCRD 202 (11 July 2019)
Mental illness and prolonged death‑row delay justified substituting death with a 25‑year custodial sentence.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Substitution of death sentence after Kigula – Mental illness (schizophrenia) as mitigating factor – Death row delay and death‑row syndrome – Life imprisonment versus fixed term – Remand time deduction.
 11 July 2019
Uganda v Mugisha (HCT – 00 – CR – SC – 0007 – 2017) [2019] UGHCCRD 37 (5 July 2019)
5 July 2019
Uganda v Kasule (HCT – 00 – CR – SC – 0168 – 2019) [2019] UGHCCRD 36 (3 July 2019)
3 July 2019
Uanda v Irimaso Alex (Criminal Session No. 120 of 2017) [2019] UGHCCRD 46 (2 July 2019)
Accused convicted of two counts of aggravated defilement based on victims’ testimony and medical corroboration; consecutive sentences imposed.
* Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – elements: victim under 14, sexual act (penetration), identity of perpetrator; corroboration by medical evidence. * Evidence – identification and credibility of child witnesses; admissibility and weight of immunization cards and medical reports. * Sentencing – aggravating factors (victim’s age, abuse of trust) and mitigation (first offender, remand credit); consecutive sentences.
 2 July 2019
Uganda V Kiggundu Muzafalu (Criminal Session Case No. 89 of 2017) [2019] UGHCCRD 49 (2 July 2019)
Accused convicted of aggravated robbery based on reliable identification and confession; sentenced to effective 20 years with remand credit.
Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – elements: theft; violence; use of deadly weapon (panga); participation. Identification evidence – torchlight and police station identifications; corroboration by charge and caution statement. Medical evidence corroborating assault. Sentencing – aggravating/mitigating factors; remand credit.
 2 July 2019
Uganda v Ssonko Jimmy (Criminal Session Case No. 119 of 2017) [2019] UGHCCRD 63 (2 July 2019)
Death and malice proved, but prosecution failed to link the accused to murder or robbery beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Murder: elements (death, unlawful killing, malice aforethought) may be inferred from injuries; Evidence – identification and proof: reliance on hearsay from non‑testifying informants undermines prosecution case; Recovered property: proper identification and production required to link accused to theft; Aggravated robbery: theft, violence and deadly weapon inferred from wounds but accused must be placed at scene.
 2 July 2019