Share
Uganda v Asiimwe (Civil Appeal 31 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 853 (29 August 2024)
- Citation
- [2024] UGHC 853
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- High Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Mugabo, J
- Case number
- Civil Appeal 31 of 2023
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- High Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Mugabo, J
- Case number
- Civil Appeal 31 of 2023
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The appeal was incurably defective because it was filed and signed by the complainant, who lacked statutory authority to do so in a criminal matter prosecuted by the DPP. The law requires that such appeals be filed and signed by the DPP or a person authorized by the DPP. Furthermore, the DPP is only permitted to appeal against acquittals and not against sentences under the Magistrates Court Act. In the absence of any statutory provision allowing the complainant or the DPP to appeal against sentence in these circumstances, the court found the appeal unsustainable and dismissed it.
Court disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
02
Material facts
Parties
Uganda
AppellantAsiimwe Shaban
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Fine Imposed by Trial Court: UGX 200,000
- Compensation Ordered by Trial Court: UGX 100,000
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the complainant had locus standi to file and sign the notice of appeal in a criminal matter prosecuted by the DPP.
- 02
Whether the appeal was properly before the court in the absence of statutory authority for the complainant to appeal against sentence.
- 03
Whether the DPP has a right to appeal against sentence under the applicable law.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The complainant, dissatisfied with the sentence and compensation awarded by the trial magistrate, sought to appeal the decision, but did not file a memorandum of appeal or obtain express permission from the DPP to file the notice of appeal.
- Respondent
- The respondent did not file a formal response, but the court considered the procedural irregularity of the appeal being filed by the complainant rather than the DPP, and the lack of statutory authority for such an appeal.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 204(5) of the Magistrates Court Act Cap. 19
The right to appeal in criminal matters is statutory and must be exercised in accordance with the law.
- 02
Section 54 of the Criminal Procedure Code Act Cap. 122
Where an appeal is made by the DPP, the notice must be signed by the DPP or an authorized person.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The appeal was incurably defective because it was filed and signed by the complainant, who lacked statutory authority to do so in a criminal matter prosecuted by the DPP. The law requires that such appeals be filed and signed by the DPP or a person authorized by the DPP. Furthermore, the DPP is only permitted to appeal against acquittals and not against sentences under the Magistrates Court Act. In the absence of any statutory provision allowing the complainant or the DPP to appeal against sentence in these circumstances, the court found the appeal unsustainable and dismissed it.
Obiter and limits
- The right to appeal is a creature of statute and cannot be exercised outside the express provisions of the law.
- No express permission was given to the complainant to file and sign the notice of appeal on behalf of the DPP.
Court disposition
appeal dismissed
- The appeal is dismissed.
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
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT FORT PORTAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 031 OF 2023 (ARISING KMG-00-CR-CO-30-2019)
UGANDA ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: APPELLANT
VERSUS
ASIIMWE SHABAN :::::::::::::::::::::: RESPONDENT
BEFORE HON. MR. JUSTICE VINCENT EMMY MUGABO
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal against the judgment and orders of H/W Kirya Martins, the then Magistrate Grade 1 of the Chief Magistrate's Court of Kamwenge, delivered on the 24th of May 2019, wherein the respondent was found guilty of the offence of assault occasioning bodily harm, sentenced to a fine of UGX. 200,000, and ordered to pay compensation of UGX 100,000 to the complainant.
Background
The respondent was charged with the offence of assault occasioning bodily harm, contrary to section 236 (now section 219) of the Penal Code Act Cap.
128. It is alleged that on the 23rd day of December 2019, at Busingye Trading Centre, Bukonderwa Cell, Kitonzi Ward in Kamwenge District, the respondent unlawfully assaulted Bakundakabo Pauline, thereby causing her actual bodily harm.
The trial magistrate found the respondent guilty as charged and sentenced him to a fine of UGX. 200,000. The trial court also ordered the respondent to pay compensation of UGX. 100,000 to the complainant.
Being dissatisfied with the orders of the trial magistrate, the complainant filed this appeal. No memorandum of appeal was filed stating the grounds or particulars of the matters of law or fact the court appealed from is alleged to have erred.
The decision of the Court
I take note of the fact that criminal proceedings against the respondent were instituted by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who should have filed and signed the notice of appeal.
Section 54 of the Criminal Procedure Code Act Cap. 122 is to the effect that where an appeal or an application for revision is made by the DPP, the notice or application, as the case may be, shall be signed by him or her or by such other person as he or she may authorize either generally or specifically for that purpose.
There is no express permission that was given to the complaint to file and sign the notice of appeal on behalf of the DPP. In the absence of any expression permission to the complainant to sign the notice of appeal, I find this appeal to have been irregularly filed.
Be that as it may, the respondent herein was convicted, and the only probable appeal would be against the sentence. Never mind that no grounds of appeal were filed to show this court which particulars of the matters of law or fact, the court appealed from is alleged to have erred.
Interestingly, the DPP is allowed to appeal against an acquittal and not sentence *(see: section 204(5) of the Magistrates Court Act Cap. 19).*
It is trite that the right to appeal is a creature of the statute and in the absence of any statutory provision of the law allowing the DPP to appeal against the sentence, this appeal cannot be sustained.
Resultantly, I find this appeal to be incurably defective and it is hereby dismissed.
It is so ordered.
Dated at Fort Portal this 29th day of August 2024.
Vincent Emmy Mugabo Judge
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.