Share
Nkeza Kaloli v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2000) (Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2000) [2000] UGHC 19 (5 December 2000)
- Citation
- [2000] UGHC 19
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- High Court of Uganda
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Case number
- Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2000
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- High Court of Uganda
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Case number
- Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2000
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that while the prosecution witnesses provided evidence of identification under reasonably good conditions, the admission of the Police Form 3 (medical report) was procedurally flawed. There was no clear consent from the appellant, and the document admitted was a photocopy without explanation for the absence of the original. The author of the report was not called to clarify doubts. As a result, the element of 'harm' required for assault occasioning actual bodily harm was not properly proved. The court held that minor inconsistencies in the evidence were immaterial, as both parties agreed an altercation occurred resulting in injury. However, due to the evidentiary defect regarding the medical report, the conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm could not stand. The conviction was substituted with common assault under section 227 of the Penal Code, and the sentence was reduced to 10 months' imprisonment, inclusive of time already served.
Court disposition
appeal_partially_allowed
Orders
- Conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm quashed.
- Sentence of two years' imprisonment set aside.
- Conviction substituted for common assault under section 227 of the Penal Code.
- Appellant sentenced to 10 months' imprisonment, inclusive of period already served.
02
Material facts
Parties
Nkeza Kaloli
Appellant Counsel: Mr. Paul MuhimburaUganda
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Original Sentence Months: 24
- Substituted Sentence Months: 10
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the appellant was properly identified as the perpetrator of the assault.
- 02
Whether contradictions and inconsistencies in the evidence were material to the conviction.
- 03
Whether the Police Form 3 (medical report) was properly admitted and proved the element of harm.
- 04
Whether the sentence imposed was excessive given the evidence.
- 05
Whether the conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm was sustainable on the evidence.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant was not positively identified, as he was unknown in the village and the incident occurred at night under poor conditions for identification. He contended there was no corroboration that the person produced in court was the one arrested. He further submitted that contradictions and inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence were material and that the Police Form 3 was wrongly admitted, being a photocopy and not the original, and without proper consent or explanation. The sentence was also challenged as severe given insufficient evidence.
- Respondent
- The prosecution relied on the testimony of five witnesses, with PW1, PW2, and PW3 all stating they saw the appellant at the scene. Conditions for identification were described as ideal due to moonlight and a candle in the house. The prosecution argued that the appellant did not deny being present or that a fight occurred. Minor inconsistencies were acknowledged but deemed immaterial, as both sides agreed an altercation took place resulting in injury. The medical report was admitted by consent, and the prosecution maintained that all elements of the offence were proved beyond reasonable doubt.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Abudala Nabulere and others vs. Uganda [1979] HCB 77
Quality of identification depends on conditions such as lighting, duration of observation, and proximity.
- 02
Uganda vs. Dusman Sabuni [1981] HCB 1; Uganda vs. Adurufu Bikamikire & Anor [1972] HCB 144
Minor contradictions and inconsistencies in evidence do not necessarily vitiate a conviction if the essential elements are proved.
- 03
AG vs. Baranga and Another EACA Civil Appeal No. 49/75 [1976] HCB 45
Admission of a medical report by consent dispenses with proving the report but does not amount to admission of its content.
- 04
Section 228 Penal Code Act
In assault occasioning actual bodily harm, prosecution must prove assault, unlawfulness, and actual bodily harm.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that while the prosecution witnesses provided evidence of identification under reasonably good conditions, the admission of the Police Form 3 (medical report) was procedurally flawed. There was no clear consent from the appellant, and the document admitted was a photocopy without explanation for the absence of the original. The author of the report was not called to clarify doubts. As a result, the element of 'harm' required for assault occasioning actual bodily harm was not properly proved. The court held that minor inconsistencies in the evidence were immaterial, as both parties agreed an altercation occurred resulting in injury. However, due to the evidentiary defect regarding the medical report, the conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm could not stand. The conviction was substituted with common assault under section 227 of the Penal Code, and the sentence was reduced to 10 months' imprisonment, inclusive of time already served.
Obiter and limits
- The fact that the arresting officer did not testify does not vitiate identification where other witnesses provide sufficient evidence.
- Where a medical report is admitted by consent, it only dispenses with proving the report but does not amount to admission of its content.
- Minor inconsistencies regarding the circumstances of the altercation are not material when the essential facts are agreed by both sides.
Court disposition
appeal_partially_allowed
- Conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm quashed.
- Sentence of two years' imprisonment set aside.
- Conviction substituted for common assault under section 227 of the Penal Code.
- Appellant sentenced to 10 months' imprisonment, inclusive of period already served.
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.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
High Court of Uganda
Judgment
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang2057\deflangfe2057{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f36\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;} {\f37\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f39\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f40\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f41\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);} {\f42\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f43\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f44\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255; \red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0; \red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph
Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\trcbpat1\trcfpat1\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{ \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \styrsid3874596 Normal (Web);}{\s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar \tqc\tx4153\tqr\tx8306\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 \sbasedon0 \snext16 \styrsid9843065 footer;}{\*\cs17 \additive \sbasedon10 \styrsid9843065 page number;}} {\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\pgptbl {\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid1853940\rsid1987140\rsid3874596\rsid5189050\rsid9843065\rsid12148238}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info{\title THE REPUBLIC F UGANDA } {\author Administrator}{\operator jchemeri}{\creatim\yr2001\mo1\dy4\hr5\min8}{\revtim\yr2001\mo1\dy4\hr5\min23}{\version4}{\edmins15}{\nofpages5}{\nofwords1007}{\nofchars5743}{\*\company
JSI}{\nofcharsws6737}{\vern24689}}\paperw11906\paperh16838 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1800\dgvorigin1440\dghshow1\dgvshow1 \jexpand\viewkind1\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct \asianbrkrule\rsidroot3874596\newtblstyruls\nogrowautofit \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\insrsid9843065 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\insrsid9843065 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\insrsid9843065 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\insrsid9843065 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \linex0\headery708\footery708\colsx708\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid1987140\sftnbj {\footer \pard\plain \s16\ql
\li0\ri0\widctlpar \tqc\tx4153\tqr\tx8306\pvpara\phmrg\posxr\posy0\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9594320 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\field{\*\fldinst {\cs17\insrsid9843065 PAGE }}{\fldrslt { \cs17\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid5189050 1}}}{\cs17\insrsid9843065 \par }\pard \s16\ql \li0\ri360\widctlpar\tqc\tx4153\tqr\tx8306\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin360\lin0\itap0\pararsid9843065 {\insrsid9843065 \par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}} {\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \s15\qc \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1 \widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9843065 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid9843065 THE REPUBLIC
}{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9843065\charrsid9843065 O}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid9843065 F UGANDA}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 \line }{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid9843065 IN THE}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA \line CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.28 OF 2000 \line (ORIGINAL KIBOGA CRIMINAL CASE NO.74 OF 2000) \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9843065 \par }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 NKEZA KALOLI::::::::::::::::}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9843065 ::::::::::::}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ACCUSED \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid9843065 VERSUS}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 \line }{ \b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid9843065 UGANDA}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 .::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9843065 ::::::::::::::::::::}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 :::::::::::::::::::::::
}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 PROSECUTION \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9843065 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9843065 {\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. AG. JUSTICE PAUL K. MUGAMBA }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid9843065 JUDGMENT:}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 \line The appellant, Nkeza Kaloli, was charged together with one Rwamunono Robert, a juvenile. The charge brought against the two was that of assa ult occasioning actual bodily harm, contrary to section 228 of the Penal Code Act. For the purposes of this appeal, the appellant was convicted as charged and sentenced to two years\rquote imprisonment. He appeals against conviction and sentence. \line } {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9843065 \par All i}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 n all the appellant set out six grounds of appeal and these were as follows: \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9843065 \par }\pard \s15\ql
\fi-720\li720\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid9843065 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 1. }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9843065 \tab }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 The trial magistrate erred in law and in fact in his interpretation and application of the well-established law and princip}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid9843065 les regarding identification. \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 \par }\pard \s15\ql \fi-720\li720\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12148238 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 2. }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \tab }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 The learned trial Magistrate erred in law and in fact in the assessment, interpretation and application of the law on contradictions and inconsistencies. \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 3. }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \tab }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 The learned trial Magistrate erred in law and in fact
when he considered the contradictions and inconsistencies made by the defence only. \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 4. }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \tab }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 The learned trial Magistrate erred in law and in fact when he ruled that there was a prima facie case against the defendant whereas not. \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 5}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid12148238 .}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 }{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \tab }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 The trial Magistrate erred in law and in fact in accessing the whole evidence the matter and consequently reached a wrong decision thereof. \line }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 6. }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \tab }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 The trial Magistrate erred in law and in fact in passing a severe sentence when there was no sufficient evidence against the appellant. \line
}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid1853940 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 In his submission, Mr. Muhimbura, counsel for the appellant said that the appellant had not been positively identified since he was unknown in the village and since the alleged incident took place at night when conditions for identification were not favourable. Counsel further argued that there was no corroboration that the per son produced in court was the one who had been arrested on the night in issue. The prosecution called five witnesses. PW1, PW2 and PW3 all testified to having seen the appellant that night at }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 PW1\rquote }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238\charrsid1987140 s}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 house. Conditions for identification were also ideal given that there was moonlight outside and a candle in the house as PW2 had occasion to testify during cross-examination by the appellant herein. I am also satisfied that given the length of ti}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 me the accused was under observat}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 ion by the witnesses, the
distance, and the light there was quality identification and reduced danger of mistaken identity. (See }{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 Abudala Nabulere and others vs. Uganda }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 [1979] }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 HCB 77). To this could be added the fact that the appellant and others were arrested soon after in the vicinity of the home of PW1. What is more, the appellant does not deny, in his defence, that he was}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 in the house of PW1 or that }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 the fight did take place. I do not agree that the fact that the arresting officer did not testify in any way vitiates identification. \line }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 The appellant also sought to gain capital in contradictions and inconsistencies apparent in evidence. These relate to the occasion of the visit such as whether the door to the house was voluntarily opened for the intruder or otherwise and whether the fight r esulted from Appellant\rquote s demand for change for money he had already paid or not. These inconsistencies are minor given the fact that both prosecutor and accused are agreed that
an altercation did indeed take place and that injury resulted to PW1. See }{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 Uganda vs. Dusman Sabuni }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 [1981] HCB 1 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 and }{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid12148238 Uganda}{\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238\charrsid12148238 vs.}{ \ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 Adurufu Bikamikire & }{\b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid12148238 Anor}{ \ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 [1972] HCB 144. \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 In a case of assault occasioning actual bodily harm three elements are necessary as the learned trial magistrate properly found. These are that there is an assault, th at the assault is unlawful and that there is actual bodily harm. In his judgment the learned magistrate had this to record in his judgment: \line
}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li720\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12148238 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 \'93\'85}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 on the third ingredient the fact of actual bodily harm. PW1 was examined and medical ex. report classified the inju}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 ry to amount to harm. }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 This report was admitted in court by consent of both parties, there was thus no need to call the Doctor to attend court to give evidence viva voce as was held in the case of }{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid12148238 Uganda vs. Selusiyo Mperwa}{\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid12148238 [}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 974] HCB 19. This court has also taken cognisance of the holding \lquote n the case }{\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 of }{ \b\ul\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 AG vs. Baranga and Another }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 EACA
}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 Civil Appeal No. }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid5189050 49/75}{\i\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 [1976] HCB 45 where it was held that where a medical report is admitted by consent it only dispenses with proving the report but does not amount to admission of its content. I still find that the third ingredient was proved by the prosecuti}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 on beyond reasonable doubt.\'94 \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid1853940 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 I do not accept the authorities quoted as persuasive in the least. There were two accused persons in court at the trial. The relevant record for }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid5189050 29}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid5189050 th}{\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 March 2000 reads in part. \line \par }\pard \s15\ql
\li720\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid5189050 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 \'93PW}{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 l }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 \line The following day I went to police }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 and made a statement those who }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 were assaulted were given PF 3 for medical check up. \line This is the form that was given to me from police. \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 PROSS: I wish tender the Police form 3 as exhibit PW1. \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 ACC: No objection. \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 COURT: Police form 3 is admitted in evidence
and marked P 1/2000.\'94 \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid1853940 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 I find much amiss. First, there were two accused persons in court on that day. It is not clear which one of the two accused had no objection to e tendering of the Police Form 3. As it is, there is no way of telling that the accused (appellant) at any time consented to the tendering of the form as court came to hold. I do not find that he did consent. Secondly, the Police Form 3 which was exhibited is a photocopy and not the original. No explanation is available as to why this should be so. There is every reason w}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 hy the author of the medical }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 report should have attended court in order to explain away the doubts that attended to the document so curi ously admitted in evidence. In the result I cannot help but agree with counsel for the appellant that Police Form 3 was wrongly admitted in evidence and that it does not, contrary to the finding of the learned trial Magistrate, import the element of \lquote harm\rquote in the assault. \line
}{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 \par }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 For the reasons I have given above this appeal must succeed partially. The conviction is hereby quashed and the sentence set aside. I substitute conviction for common assault C/S 227 of the Penal Code and a sentence of 10 months imprisonm ent inclusive of the period already served. \line }{\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050 \par Paul K. Mugamba }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 Ag. Judge. \line }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid5189050
\par }{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 5}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\super\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid5189050 th}{\b\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 December 2000 \line }{ \lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 Mr. Paul Muhimbura for the appellant \line \line \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1853940 \fs24\lang2057\langfe2057\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp2057 {\lang1033\langfe2057\langnp1033\insrsid3874596\charrsid1987140 \par }}
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.