Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Uganda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Moses Kabareebe v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 57 of 2023) [2025] UGSC 24 (8 July 2025)
The Supreme Court quashed Moses Kabareebe’s rape conviction, holding that grave contradictions in the prosecution evidence left reasonable doubt about non-consensual sex.
Uganda v Musoke (Criminal Session Case 46 of 2020) [2024] UGHC 731 (28 March 2024)
The court found that while theft of the phone and threat to use a deadly weapon were proved, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused participated in the robbery. Contradictions in the prosecution's evidence, particularly regarding the timing of the alleged theft and the accused's alleged handing over of the stolen phone before the robbery, as well as issues with the alleged confession (which was unsigned and contradicted by the signed charge and caution statement), created reasonable doubt. The identification evidence was also insufficient due to poor lighting…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Musoke (HCT-14-CR-SC 46 of 2020) [2024] UGHC 359 (28 March 2024)
The High Court acquitted Musoke Ali of aggravated robbery, finding that while theft and threat were proved, participation was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Uganda v Komakech & 2 Others (Criminal Session 153 of 2019) [2024] UGHC 414 (5 March 2024)
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the core ingredient of theft beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant's testimony was inconsistent regarding what was stolen, and no witness saw any accused take money or property. Contradictions among prosecution witnesses further undermined credibility. The court held that the evidence did not establish a prima facie case against any accused for aggravated robbery, as the essential element of theft was not proved. The actions of the accused appeared focused on destruction of property, not robbery, and possible land dispute motives were no…
Source excerpt
Owachgiu v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2021) [2022] UGHCACD 8 (7 December 2022)
The High Court allowed an appeal against an embezzlement conviction, finding errors in admitting late prosecution evidence and in proving the specific amount charged.
Matanda v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 71 of 2018) [2021] UGCA 118 (18 October 2021)
The Court of Appeal quashed Matanda Richard Wamukota’s conviction for indecent assault, holding that the evidence did not prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt.
Lubega v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 2019) [2020] UGHCACD 11 (28 August 2020)
The High Court set aside Lubega Stevenson’s embezzlement convictions, substituted a conviction for receiving stolen property, upheld a one-year sentence already served, and set aside compensation.
Uganda v Omona Frank (Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 2018) [2020] UGHC 145 (14 August 2020)
The appellate court found that the respondent, initially having lawful possession of the motorcycle and laptop, lost any defence of mistake of fact once he was notified to return the assets and instead asserted a lien not recognized by law. His refusal to return the items, conditional upon payment of alleged outstanding wages, constituted an intent to permanently deprive the owner. The respondent's conduct amounted to conversion and theft under Ugandan law. The trial court erred in its interpretation of the law and in failing to recognize the prosecution's proof beyond reasonable doubt of the…
Source excerpt
Mugumba Siraji v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 0010 of 2017) [2019] UGHC 101 (24 September 2019)
The High Court found that the trial magistrate failed to properly evaluate the evidence, particularly regarding major inconsistencies and contradictions in the prosecution's case. The identification evidence was unreliable due to poor lighting, lack of familiarity, and contradictory witness accounts. The chain of custody for the panga and other exhibits was not established, undermining their evidential value. The trial court also failed to consider the defence evidence and possible defences, instead forming an unbalanced view by preferring the prosecution's case without adequate scrutiny. The…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Angura (HCT – 00 – CR – SC – 1115 OF 2016) [2019] UGHCCRD 38 (21 May 2019)
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of aggravated robbery beyond reasonable doubt. There was no credible evidence that the accused was armed with a deadly weapon, nor was there proof of theft or robbery involving the alleged victims. The prosecution did not produce Mukasa Ronald, the alleged victim, as a witness, and there was a material contradiction between the testimonies of PW1 and PW2 regarding the alleged stolen money. The investigating and arresting officers were not called to testify, and the evidence presented was insufficient and contradictory…
Source excerpt
