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
Uganda v Bakaki & Ors (HCT-03-CR-CN-45-2014) [2017] UGHCCRD 143 (29 September 2017)
The High Court dismissed the State’s appeal against acquittal, finding identification evidence unsafe and the respondents’ alibis insufficiently rebutted.
Twine Naboth v Uganda (Criminal Appeal. No. 01/2011) [2011] UGHC 156 (31 October 2011)
The trial magistrate erred in law by shifting the burden of proof to the accused, contrary to fundamental principles of criminal law. The prosecution failed to prove the offences of embezzlement and abuse of office beyond reasonable doubt. The unresolved question of who received the money paid to a ghost teacher created reasonable doubt, and the trial magistrate did not properly evaluate the evidence in its totality. The conviction and sentence were therefore unlawful, and the appeal was allowed, with the conviction quashed and sentence set aside.
Source excerpt
Uganda v Paul Kiwanuka (alias Kiwalyanga) (Criminal Session Case No. 473 of 1996) [1998] UGHC 3 (27 October 1998)
The High Court acquitted the accused of defilement, finding the prosecution had not proved beyond reasonable doubt that he was the perpetrator.
Uganda v Odwong and Another (High Court Criminal Session 282 of 92) [1993] UGHC 41 (17 August 1993)
The High Court acquitted two accused in robbery and rape charges, holding that the prosecution failed to prove use of a deadly weapon and lacked corroboration.
Tibagwa v Regina (Criminal Appeal No. 223 of 1952) [1952] EACA 268 (1 January 1952)
The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa quashed a murder conviction, holding that the circumstantial evidence did not prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Rex v Gordhan (Criminal Appeal No. 58 of 1948) [1948] EACA 25 (1 January 1948)
The Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa held that disbelief of an accused’s evidence alone cannot sustain a conviction where the evidence as a whole leaves reasonable doubt.
Rex v Murimbocho (Criminal Case No. 25 of 1945) [1945] EACA 62 (1 January 1945)
The court found that the accused had consistently raised an alibi from the very beginning of the proceedings and had called supporting witnesses at the earliest opportunity. This, combined with the circumstances of the case, left the court in significant doubt as to the reliability of the identification evidence provided by the Crown witnesses. The judge concluded that the possibility of mistaken identification was so substantial that it would be unsafe to convict the accused. Accordingly, the presence of reasonable doubt necessitated an acquittal.
Source excerpt
Rex v Sumba (Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 1942) [1943] EACA 43 (1 January 1943)
The East African Court of Appeal quashed a conviction for stealing by an agent, finding reasonable doubt on the evidence and noting likely prejudice from multiple unproved charges.
Rex v Lokarkar (Criminal Case No. 59 of 1942) [1942] EACA 60 (1 January 1942)
The court convicted the accused of murder, but held that the prosecution had not proved beyond reasonable doubt that he was over sixteen, so detention during the Governor's pleasure applied.
Rex v Soto (CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 56 OF 1939) [1939] EACA 122 (1 January 1939)
The court found that although the injury to the appellant was not caused by the deceased, it was possible that the appellant was assaulted by one or more members of the group inside the hut and did not know who inflicted the injury. In such circumstances, it is not unreasonable to regard the provocation as flowing from the group as a whole. Since the defence of provocation only requires the raising of a reasonable doubt, and such doubt existed as to whether there was legal provocation, the court held that the conviction for murder should be reduced to manslaughter. The appellant was according…
Source excerpt
