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.
16 judgments
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
16 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
April 2021
Appellate court upheld kidnapping and forgery convictions but reduced several excessive sentences for the first appellant.
* Criminal law – Kidnap with intent to confine – kidnapping by deceit to facilitate fraud and dispossession of property. * Criminal law – Forgery and uttering forged documents – proofs, document expert evidence and denials by official custodians. * Criminal procedure – Appellate review – duty of first appellate court to re-evaluate evidence and draw independent conclusions. * Criminal law – Giving false information to a public officer – conviction where sufficient evidence supports falsity. * Sentencing – appellate interference where sentence is manifestly excessive; concurrency of sentences.
29 April 2021
Applicant indicted for murder granted bail subject to cash bail, non-cash bonds and monthly reporting.
Criminal procedure – Bail for indicted persons – Trial on Indictments Act ss.14–15 and judicial discretion; Article 23(6)(a) right to apply for bail; presumption of innocence; adequacy of sureties and reporting conditions.
28 April 2021
Court granted bail for aggravated robbery charge exercising discretion despite no proven "exceptional circumstances."
Criminal procedure – Bail pending trial – Aggravated robbery – Court discretion under Trial on Indictments Act to grant bail even absent proven "exceptional circumstances"; fixed abode and substantial sureties mitigating flight risk; bail conditions (cash deposit and surety bonds).
27 April 2021
Appellant found to have participated in land‑title forgery; convictions upheld but sentences revised and remand deducted.
* Criminal law – evaluation of evidence – appellate duty to review evidence as a whole and assess credibility.* Criminal law – burden of proof – prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; no improper shift to accused.* Forgery and uttering – possession and production of forged land titles as key evidence of participation.* Personation and conspiracy – joint enterprise where each role facilitates large‑scale deception in land fraud.* Sentencing – appellate revision where trial sentence disproportionate and remand time to be deducted.
18 April 2021
Appeal against convictions for land title forgery and related offences dismissed; sentences revised and remand credited.
Criminal law – Forgery and uttering of land titles; personation and obtaining money by false pretence; appellate review of evidence; burden of proof; sentence revision for land title forgery.
18 April 2021
Appellate court affirmed convictions for false pretence, personation, forgery and uttering and dismissed appeal; remand time was considered.
Criminal law – Obtaining by false pretence; personation; forgery and uttering false documents – Proof of intent to defraud; possession of forged documents as inference of guilt – Burden of proof remains on prosecution – Sentencing: remand credit; appellate review of convictions and sentence.
18 April 2021
Appeal dismissed: prosecution proved false pretence, personation, forgery and uttering; remand credited; duress unproven.
* Criminal law – Obtaining money by false pretence – elements and proof beyond reasonable doubt; personation; forgery and uttering false documents. * Evidence – identification, possession of forged documents, and probative value of Registrar of Titles’ evidence. * Burden of proof – rests on prosecution; conviction cannot rest on weakness of defence. * Sentencing – remand period must be taken into account (Article 23(8)). * Duress – allegation requires evidential support.
18 April 2021
High Court cannot review its own first‑appellate conviction; the proper remedy is a second appeal.
* Jurisdiction – whether High Court may review its own first‑appellate judgment; * Criminal procedure – available remedy is a second appeal, not review by the same court; * Inherent powers/Article 126(2)(e)/Section 33 – cannot displace statutory remedies; * Functus officio – finality of appellate judgments; * Alleged denial of fair hearing/service – not remedied by review where specific appeal route exists.
14 April 2021
High Court cannot review its own first-appeal conviction; aggrieved party’s remedy is a second appeal to the Court of Appeal.
* Criminal procedure – jurisdiction – review of a High Court judgment delivered as first appellate court – functus officio. * Judicial powers – inherent powers and Article 126(2)(e)/Section 33 Judicature Act – limitations where statutory remedies exist. * Appeals – remedy against first appellate decisions is by second appeal to the Court of Appeal.
14 April 2021
Section 129A is procedural only; aggravated defilement must be tried by the High Court.
Penal law – defilement; section 129 – substantive offence; section 129A – procedural provision for child offenders (no new offence); constitutional principle nulla poena sine lege; jurisdiction – aggravated defilement triable only by High Court.
14 April 2021
Court granted bail where accused had fixed abode, substantial sureties and unexplained delay in committal despite serious charge.
* Constitutional law – presumption of innocence – right to bail pending trial under Article 28(3). * Criminal procedure – Trial on Indictments Act (s.14(1), s.15) – discretionary grant of bail; exceptional circumstances not invariably required. * Bail requirements – fixed place of abode, substantial sureties, unexplained delay in committal; appropriate bail conditions.
9 April 2021
Bail denied where applicant’s age/health claims unproven, residence and sureties doubtful, and risk to witnesses existed.
* Criminal procedure – Bail pending trial – Discretion under Sections 14 and 15 of the Trial on Indictments Act and Article 28(3) – Exceptional circumstances (advanced age, grave illness) require proof but are not mandatory for bail. * Bail – Fixed place of abode and sound sureties within jurisdiction – essential to guarantee compliance. * Refugee status and undocumented residence – impact on ability to control movements and risk of absconding. * Witness protection – familial relationship with victim strengthens risk of interference and supports refusal of bail.
8 April 2021
Court granted bail for an accused charged with aggravated robbery, exercising discretion without requiring exceptional circumstances, subject to specified deposit and sureties.
Bail — Presumption of innocence and personal liberty — Discretion under s.14(1) Trial on Indictments Act — Exceptional circumstances not mandatory — Sufficiency and verification of sureties — Conditions: cash deposit, non-cash surety bonds, monthly reporting.
7 April 2021
A criminal conviction based on a land ownership dispute and hearsay was quashed; honest claim of right requires civil resolution.
Criminal law – land dispute – honest claim of right; criminalisation of civil matters; appellate re-evaluation of evidence; hearsay evidence inadmissibility; conviction quashed and acquittal substituted.
7 April 2021
Bail denied for aggravated defilement due to gravity of the offence and risk to a vulnerable child witness.
Criminal procedure – Bail pending trial – Discretion under Sections 14 and 15 of the Trial on Indictments Act; Constitutional right to bail and presumption of innocence (Article 28(3)); Factors: fixed abode and sureties versus gravity of offence and protection of vulnerable child witness; Risk of intimidation and public interest in refusing bail.
6 April 2021
Bail refused due to an unreliable surety, seriousness of the alleged offence, and risk to complainant despite presumption of innocence.
Bail — constitutional presumption of innocence vs discretionary denial; Criteria under s.14(1) and s.15 Trial on Indictments Act; sufficiency and proximity of sureties; seriousness of alleged offence and complainant safety; identity issues.
1 April 2021