Download

Uganda Judgment

High Court of Uganda

Uganda v Ojok (Criminal Revision 4 of 1995) [1995] UGHC 51 (18 December 1995)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that the sentence imposed on the accused was illegal as it did not comply with the requirements of section 113(1)(a) of the TRSA '70. The Resident State Attorney conceded the illegality and did not oppose revision. The court exercised its revisionary powers to set aside the illegal sentence and substitute it with a lawful one, imposing a fine of 5,000/= or one month imprisonment in default, and ordering the refund of the excess fine paid by the accused.

Court disposition

sentence set aside and substituted

Orders

  • The illegal sentence is set aside.
  • The accused is sentenced to a fine of 5,000/= or in default one month imprisonment.
  • The balance of 70,000/= is to be refunded to the accused.

02

Material facts

Parties

Uganda

Applicant

Ojok Richard

Respondent

Amounts and remedies

  • Original Fine Paid: UGX 75,000
  • Substituted Fine: UGX 5,000
  • Refund Amount: UGX 70,000

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Revision / Order

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Resident State Attorney agreed that the sentence imposed was illegal due to non-compliance with the section creating the offence and did not wish to be heard further if a revision order was made.
Respondent
The accused did not make further submissions; the matter was determined on the record and the agreement of the Resident State Attorney.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Section 113(1)(a) of the TRSA '70

    A sentence must comply with the statutory provisions creating the offence.

  2. 02

    Criminal Revision jurisdiction

    Where an illegal sentence is imposed, the court has power to revise and substitute a lawful sentence.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that the sentence imposed on the accused was illegal as it did not comply with the requirements of section 113(1)(a) of the TRSA '70. The Resident State Attorney conceded the illegality and did not oppose revision. The court exercised its revisionary powers to set aside the illegal sentence and substitute it with a lawful one, imposing a fine of 5,000/= or one month imprisonment in default, and ordering the refund of the excess fine paid by the accused.

Court disposition

sentence set aside and substituted

  • The illegal sentence is set aside.
  • The accused is sentenced to a fine of 5,000/= or in default one month imprisonment.
  • The balance of 70,000/= is to be refunded to the accused.

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

[1995] UGHC 51

THE REPUBLIC OP UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA - AT GUDU CRIMINAL REVISION ORDER NO. MG. 4/95 (Original Cr. Case No. TMG 291/95) Uganda versus ........ Ojok Richard. Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice G. M. Okello.

ORDER:-

The accused was charged and convicted on his own plea of guilty of using a motor vehicle for the carriage of • Passengers for hire or regard without a licence contrary to section 113(l)(a) of the TRSA '70. He was sentenced to <sup>6</sup> months imprisonment or to a fine of shs 75,OOo/= in lieu thereof. The fine was paid.

As the Resident State Attorney agrees that the above sentence is illegal for non compliance with the section which created the offence and did not wish to be heard in the event of a revision order being made, the illegal sentence is set aside. In its place the following orders are substituted:-

Ct. I:- Accused is sentenced to a fine of 5,000/= or in default <sup>1</sup> month imprisonment. The balance of 70,00q/= be refunded to 'die accused.

I t-c. -X. Z G. E. Okello Resident Judge Gulu.

18/12/95-

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.

Section 113(1)(a) TRSA '70

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.