Download

Uganda Judgment

High Court of Uganda

Atwijyukire Miria & Another v Uganda (Criminal Application No.79 of 2019) [2020] UGHC 7 (24 January 2020)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that although the applicants are presumed innocent and have a right to apply for bail, the circumstances of the case—specifically the family land wrangles that led to the alleged murder—create a risk that releasing the applicants could re-ignite conflict and endanger their lives and those of other family members. The court exercised its discretion to deny bail, prioritizing the administration of justice and public safety over the applicants' liberty at this stage.

Court disposition

bail_denied

Orders

  • Bail is denied to both applicants.

02

Material facts

Parties

Atwijukyire Miria

Applicant

Kabwengyere Darias

Applicant

Uganda

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Bail Application Pending Trial

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicants argue that they are presumed innocent until proven guilty, have a fixed place of abode within the jurisdiction, have substantial sureties, have been on remand for over nine months, and that it is fair and just to grant bail as they cannot be compensated for suffering if acquitted.
Respondent
The respondent opposes bail, citing the seriousness of the offence, the potential risk to the applicants and their family due to ongoing land wrangles, and the possibility that release could re-ignite family conflict and endanger lives.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Article 28(3) Constitution of the Republic of Uganda

    Every person is presumed innocent until proved guilty or pleads guilty.

  2. 02

    Article 23(6)(a) Constitution of the Republic of Uganda

    Persons accused of criminal offences have a right to apply for bail.

  3. 03

    Uganda v Kiiza Besigye, Const. Ref No. 20 of 2005

    Grant of bail is discretionary and depends on the circumstances of each case.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that although the applicants are presumed innocent and have a right to apply for bail, the circumstances of the case—specifically the family land wrangles that led to the alleged murder—create a risk that releasing the applicants could re-ignite conflict and endanger their lives and those of other family members. The court exercised its discretion to deny bail, prioritizing the administration of justice and public safety over the applicants' liberty at this stage.

Obiter and limits

  • Release on bail is not automatic and is subject to judicial discretion based on the merits of each case.
  • The interests of justice and public safety may outweigh the presumption of innocence in bail applications for serious offences.

Court disposition

bail_denied

  • Bail is denied to both applicants.

Source and reliance status

High Court of Uganda

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

High Court of Uganda

Judgment

[2020] UGHC 7

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT MBARARA

MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 79 OF 2019

(Arising from H. C Cr. Case. No. 079 of 2018)

1. ATWIJUKYIRE MIRIA

2. KABWENGYERE DARIAS:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::APPLICANTS

VERSUS

UGANDA::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::RESPONDENT

BEFORE: HON JUSTICE SSEKAANA MUSA

RULING

This is an application for bail pending trial of the applicants who are charged with the offence of Murder contrary to sections 188 and 189 of the Penal Code Act Cap 120. The applicants are alleged to have murdered Agaba Johnson alias Kabeere on the 13th day of November 2018 at Nyakibigi cell Ntungamo District.

Grounds of this application

- 1. The applicants have been charged with the offence of murder C/S 188 and 189 of the Penal Code Act but they have neither pleaded guilty nor been proven guilty and are still presumed to be innocent until the contrary is proved. - 2. That the applicants have a permanent place of abode at Nyakibigi Cell Kahunga Ward, Western Division in Ntungamo District within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. - 3. That the applicants have substantial sureties who are ready to guarantee their return for trial.

- 4. The applicants have been on remand for over 9 months now. - 5. That it is just fair, reasonable and in the interest of justice that this application be granted in so far as in the event of acquittal the applicants will never be compensated for the suffering they will have gone through while in detention.

According to Article 23 (6) (a) and 28 (3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, persons accused of criminal offences have a right to apply for bail.

It is trite law that under Article 28(3) of the *Constitution of the Republic of Uganda*, every person is presumed innocent until proved guilty or pleads guilty. Consequently, an accused person should not be kept on remand unnecessarily without trial. In well deserving cases the accused person should be granted bail if he or she fulfils the conditions for his or her release.

An Applicant should not be incarcerated if he or she is unlikely to abscond or interfere with witnesses for the prosecution, has a fixed place of abode, has sound sureties capable of guaranteeing that he or she will comply with the conditions of his or her bail and is willing to abide by all other conditions set by the court.

However, the grant of bail is discretionary to the court *(see Uganda Vs Kiiza Besigye; Const. Ref No. 20 OF 2005).* Whether or not the court is inclined to exercise the discretion whether to grant or not grant bail is a matter depending on circumstances of each particular case to be weighed on individual merits or demerits of the case. It is established that release on bail is not automatic. Whether or not to release the accused on bail is a preserve of the discretion of court.

In this case, the applicants are siblings who have been charged with a capital offence of murder. The applicant state in their respective affidavits that they have a fixed place of abode and both presented two sureties.

However in the circumstances surrounding the alleged offence, the court is hesitant to grant bail to the applicants. According to the summary of case, the alleged offence was a result family land wrangles. Releasing the applicants on bail could re-ignite the land wrangles in the family considering that the family already lost one of the family members.

I am of the considered opinion at this stage that it is not in the best interest of the administration of justice to release the applicants on bail. Release of the applicants at this point in time will endanger their own lives as well as that of other members of their family.

Bail is denied.

I so order.

SSEKAANA MUSA JUDGE 24th January 2020

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Uganda v Kiiza Besigye, Const. Ref No. 20 of 2005

Case cited

Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, Article 23(6)(a)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, Article 28(3)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Penal Code Act Cap 120, Sections 188 and 189

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this JurisAssist collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.