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
Opio v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 184 of 2024) [2024] UGHCCRD 49 (6 June 2024)
The High Court dismissed an application for mandatory bail after finding the applicant had already been committed for trial, so Article 23(6)(c) no longer applied.
Luyima v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 184 of 2024) [2024] UGHCCRD 53 (6 June 2024)
The applicant was committed to the High Court for trial on 7th June 2023, as confirmed by the court record and database. Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution provides for mandatory bail only if the accused has been on remand for 180 days before committal. Since the applicant has already been committed, he does not qualify for mandatory bail. The provisions are mandatory and do not permit release after committal. Therefore, the application for mandatory bail fails and is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Nyanzi v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 194 of 2024) [2024] UGHCCRD 52 (6 June 2024)
The High Court dismissed an application for mandatory bail because the applicant had already been committed to the High Court for trial.
Olobo v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 27 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 526 (3 May 2024)
The High Court at Soroti granted bail to an accused charged with aggravated robbery and murder, finding he had a fixed abode and substantial sureties.
Oliborit v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 41 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 338 (23 April 2024)
The court held that while the offences of murder and aggravated robbery are bailable and the applicant has a constitutional right to apply for bail, the grant of bail is discretionary and depends on the applicant satisfying the court that he will not abscond and that there are substantial sureties. The applicant failed to provide documentary proof of a fixed place of abode within the court's jurisdiction and did not disclose or provide documentation for any proposed sureties. In the absence of such evidence, the court could not be satisfied that the applicant would not abscond if released on…
Source excerpt
Byakika v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 3 of 2023) [2023] UGHCCRD 120 (4 August 2023)
The court held that the right to apply for bail is fundamental and premised on the presumption of innocence. The applicant demonstrated a fixed place of abode and presented substantial sureties, all of whom were close relatives and not disputed by the respondent. The court found that exceptional circumstances are not mandatory for the grant of bail, and the primary consideration is whether the applicant will attend trial if released. The gravity of the offence alone does not bar the grant of bail. The court was satisfied that the applicant would comply with bail conditions and therefore exerc…
Source excerpt
Begira v Uganda (Bail Application) (Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 28 of 2022) [2022] UGHC 44 (23 November 2022)
The High Court at Fort Portal granted Begira Julius bail pending trial for murder, finding his sureties substantial and no persuasive risk of absconding.
Mugisha v Uganda (HCT – 01 – CR – CM – NO – 050 OF 2018) [2019] UGHCCRD 19 (24 January 2019)
The High Court at Fort Portal granted Mugisha Ronald bail in a rape case, finding suitable sureties, a fixed abode, and no objection from the state.
Uganda v Serwamba & Ors (HCT-00-CN 24 of 2015) [2015] UGHCACD 16 (30 June 2015)
High Court of Uganda denied bail in a corruption case, holding that most applicants had no valid supporting affidavits and that the remaining applicant lacked proof of fixed abode and strong sureties.
Uganda v Mukasa (Criminal Application 20 of 1994) [1994] UGHC 77 (21 March 1994)
The High Court granted bail to a 68-year-old applicant charged with defilement, holding that his age qualified as advanced age and that he had shown sufficient sureties.
