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 Nakaweesi Jane and Others (Criminal Session No. 191 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 499 (10 July 2025)
The High Court acquitted Ssengabi Ronald of aggravated robbery after finding the prosecution failed to prove use of a deadly weapon or his participation beyond reasonable doubt.
Uganda v Mbaju Stephen and Masereka Moris (Criminal Sessions Case 96 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 392 (15 May 2025)
The High Court convicted both accused of aggravated robbery, finding they jointly attacked the victim with a panga and stole his property.
Uganda v Lugobango Hamis alias Mulinda & Mpoya Ben (Criminal Session 47 of 2020) [2023] UGHC 243 (17 October 2023)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence on all essential ingredients of aggravated robbery. The victim's testimony, corroborated by other witnesses and medical evidence, established theft of the motorcycle and cash, violence through the infliction of grievous harm with a panga, and use of a deadly weapon. The accused's presence, actions, and failure to dissociate himself from the assault demonstrated common intention with A1. Identification was reliable due to prior acquaintance and daylight conditions. The absence of the physical motorcycle in court was not fatal…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Senyondo and Another (Criminal Session Case 503 of 2019) [2023] UGHCCRD 162 (17 August 2023)
The High Court convicted Senyondo Ibrahim of aggravated robbery and acquitted Niwagira Nicholas after finding the eyewitness identification reliable.
Muhindo v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 119 of 2011) [2022] UGCA 299 (23 December 2022)
The Court of Appeal found that both PW1 and PW2 had prior knowledge of the appellant and sufficient opportunity to observe him during the robbery, with ample lighting from torches, making their identification credible. Minor inconsistencies in their testimonies did not undermine the core facts. The absence of a medical report or production of the weapon was not fatal, as credible witness testimony established the use of a deadly weapon within the meaning of section 285(3) of the Penal Code Act. On sentencing, the trial judge complied with Article 23(8) as interpreted at the time by stating he…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Mugerwa and Another (Criminal Session Case 44 of 2020) [2022] UGHCCRD 118 (15 November 2022)
The court found that the prosecution proved all elements of aggravated robbery beyond reasonable doubt. The theft of the motorcycle was established by the victim's unchallenged testimony. The use of violence and a deadly weapon was corroborated by medical evidence and the victim's account of being struck with a hammer, resulting in grievous harm. The identification of the accused was reliable, as the victim knew both accused personally, observed them under adequate lighting, and immediately reported their identities after regaining consciousness. The court applied caution in assessing identif…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Mugera and Another (HCT-00-CR-SC 44 of 2020) [2022] UGHCCRD 143 (15 November 2022)
The court found that the prosecution proved all elements of aggravated robbery beyond reasonable doubt. The victim's testimony established theft of the motorcycle, the use of violence, and the application of a deadly weapon (hammer) resulting in grievous harm. Identification of the accused was based on recognition under adequate lighting conditions, corroborated by immediate reporting and medical evidence. The accused were positively placed at the scene, and no evidence was presented to challenge the prosecution's case. The court, therefore, convicted both Mugera Tadeo and Aruho Allan of aggr…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Mugisha and Another (CR-SC 283 of 2020) [2022] UGHCCRD 85 (30 September 2022)
The court found that the prosecution proved all ingredients of aggravated robbery beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant was robbed of UGX 55,000,000 after being threatened with a gun and a pistol by the accused persons, who were positively identified by the complainant and corroborated by several witnesses. The court held that minor contradictions in the prosecution's case did not go to the root of the matter and were disregarded. The use of deadly weapons was established through consistent witness testimony, even though the weapons were not recovered. Call data records and witness account…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Muwanga and Another aka kamada (HCT-00-CR-SC 513 of 2019) [2022] UGHCCRD 146 (5 July 2022)
The High Court convicted two accused persons of aggravated robbery after finding that the victim reliably identified them and proved theft, violence, and use of a knife.
Uganda v Sebirumbi and Another (Criminal Session Case 513 of 2019) [2022] UGHCCRD 120 (5 July 2022)
The High Court convicted two accused persons of aggravated robbery after finding the victim’s identification reliable and the elements of the offence proved.
