|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1972 |
|
|
Acquittal where circumstantial and medical evidence raised reasonable doubt about intentional infanticide.
* Criminal law – Infanticide – Whether prosecution proved deliberate disposal of newborn beyond reasonable doubt.* Evidence – Circumstantial and medical evidence – conflicting expert opinions on umbilical cord, placenta and passage through latrine opening.* Procedure – Adequacy of scene investigation and timing of medical examination affecting evidential value.* Credibility – weight to be given to distressed conduct and contemporaneous witness observations.
|
4 December 1972 |
| November 1972 |
|
|
The respondent was convicted of rape and murder based on eyewitness identification, corroboration and medical evidence.
* Criminal law – murder – elements proved by identification, medical and corroborative evidence – manual strangulation as cause of death.
* Criminal law – sexual offences – evidence of non‑consensual intercourse corroborated by circumstances and forensic signs.
* Evidence – admissibility and use of bad‑character/reputation evidence to explain witness conduct; caution in its weight.
* Defence – alibi and its evaluation against corroborative prosecution evidence.
|
25 November 1972 |
|
|
13 November 1972 |
|
The applicant successfully challenged a purported will for failing customary and statutory execution requirements.
Wills — customary and statutory execution requirements — written will by a literate testator must be witnessed by at least two persons, one a kinsman — defective attestation invalidates will; Civil procedure — court site visit — unfairness where one party is denied audience; Succession — oral declarations cannot cure defective written will; Clan property versus personal estate relevance to testamentary formalities.
|
4 November 1972 |
| October 1972 |
|
|
Appellants' challenge to their theft convictions failed because the trial court rightly accepted credible prosecution evidence.
* Criminal law – Theft – Whether prosecution proved theft beyond reasonable doubt – Credibility of witnesses; identification evidence.
* Evidence – Evaluation of trial magistrate’s credibility findings – Appellate scope of interference with factual findings.
* Criminal appeal – When appellate court should uphold conviction and sentence.
|
18 October 1972 |
| August 1972 |
|
|
Conviction for stealing goods in transit upheld; packing slip admissible under Evidence Act s.34(b).
* Criminal law – stealing goods in transit – sufficiency of evidence to prove theft where accused found sewing a bag containing missing cargo; witness contradictions considered as matters of degree.
* Evidence – hearsay – packing slip admissible under Section 34(b) (maker’s attendance cannot reasonably be procured).
* Criminal procedure – burden of proof – misdirections in judgment do not necessarily vitiate conviction if evidence remains sufficient.
* Sentence – three years’ imprisonment upheld given position of trust and interim loss to consignees.
|
17 August 1972 |
| July 1972 |
|
|
Suspicion and circumstantial evidence that do not exclude reasonable innocence cannot sustain an arson conviction.
Criminal law – Arson – Circumstantial evidence – Whether facts exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence – Suspicion and flight insufficient to ground conviction – Conviction quashed for insufficiency of evidence.
|
14 July 1972 |
|
Convictions for forgery and theft affirmed; sentence reduced for misapplication of Minimum Sentence Act and compensation corrected.
* Criminal law – Forgery – falsification of salary sheets to obtain payment; evidence and credibility assessments. * Criminal law – Stealing by servant – misappropriation of employer’s cash and partial restitution as mitigation. * Sentencing – Misapplication of Minimum Sentence Act Schedule; entitlement to resentencing. * Compensation – correction of compensation order to reflect actual loss.
|
4 July 1972 |
| June 1972 |
|
|
Conviction for stealing by a public servant quashed for inadequate proof and improper inference from failure to record receipts.
Criminal law – Stealing by public servant – Burden of proof to show accused received monies and had exclusive access to place of safekeeping – Inference from failure to account – Distinction between stealing and accounting/fraud offences.
|
30 June 1972 |
|
Appeal against 12‑month sentence for unprovoked spanner assault dismissed; voluntary intoxication not mitigating.
Criminal law – Assault causing actual bodily harm (s.241 Penal Code) – Sentence severity – Voluntary intoxication not a mitigating factor – Appeal against sentence dismissed.
|
30 June 1972 |
|
|
30 June 1972 |
|
Sentence based on incorrect assumption that offence was scheduled was altered; conviction upheld, imprisonment reduced and corporal punishment set aside.
* Criminal law – Sentencing – Whether an offence is a "scheduled offence" depends on legal status at time of commission – Sentence based on incorrect classification reviewable on appeal – Mitigating factors (first offender, youth, restitution) may justify reduction – Corporal punishment set aside.
|
24 June 1972 |
|
Conviction upheld but sentence set aside as excessive; conditional discharge substituted and compensation order confirmed.
Criminal law – Assault – Appellate review of conviction and sentence – Whether sentence manifestly excessive – Substitution with conditional discharge – Confirmation of compensation and repayment of fine.
|
16 June 1972 |
|
The court allowed the applicant's appeal, convicting the respondent for tyre theft based on reliable police identification and discrediting his taxi defence.
* Criminal law – identification evidence – positive identification by police on patrol at night supported conviction. * Criminal law – appeal against acquittal – appellate court may reverse acquittal where trial court wrongly accepts implausible defence. * Theft from motor vehicle – participation and presence at scene with vehicle lights off supports inference of guilt.
|
9 June 1972 |
| May 1972 |
|
|
Improper aggregation of multiple theft occasions into one count prejudiced sentencing; sentence reduced to nine months imprisonment.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Multiple distinct occasions of non‑accounting constitute separate offences – Improper aggregation into single count prejudices sentencing advantages under Minimum Sentences Act (s.5(2)) – Special circumstances justify reduction of sentence.
|
12 May 1972 |
|
Fingerprint identification upheld conviction for attempted tyre theft; remand time served warranted immediate release.
* Criminal law – Evidence – Fingerprints – Whether a fingerprint found on a vehicle supported conviction for attempted theft where accused offered no explanation.
* Criminal procedure – Appeal against conviction – Appellate review where evidence (fingerprint identification) was unchallenged and no reasonable doubt shown.
* Sentencing – Remand custody – Effect of time spent on remand on execution of sentence and entitlement to release.
|
1 May 1972 |
| April 1972 |
|
|
Appellant’s labour-related convictions quashed where charges were duplicitous and evidence was insufficient.
* Labour law – framing of charges – duplicity – failure to pay wages/minimum wages over multiple months cannot be lumped into a single count and is a nullity. * Labour law – severance pay – prosecution must prove employer–employee relationship and circumstances of termination. * Statutory record-keeping offences – distinct offences must be charged separately. * Criminal procedure – defective framing and insufficient evidence warrant quashing convictions and sentences.
|
12 April 1972 |
|
The appellants' convictions on victim identification were upheld and original sentences increased for aggravated robbery.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Identification by a single witness – Familiarity of complainant and bright moonlight – Reliance on single-witness identification permitted where positive and credible – Sentencing – appellate substitution of sentence where original term inadequately reflects gravity and previous convictions.
|
7 April 1972 |
| March 1972 |
|
|
Appeal against robbery with violence conviction dismissed; sentence upheld in principle but long term reduced and ordered to run concurrently.
Criminal law – House‑breaking and robbery with violence – Identification evidence corroborated by eye‑witness and medical reports – Appeal against conviction dismissed; sentencing varied/amalgamated and ordered to run concurrently.
|
29 March 1972 |
|
Possession of stolen goods in accused’s room requires satisfactory explanation; absence or false explanation supports conviction.
* Criminal law – possession of recently stolen property – where stolen goods are found in accused’s room, accused must give satisfactory explanation; false or no explanation supports conviction.
* Evidence – company records admissible as official records to clarify employment and delivery dates.
* Fair trial – accused’s right to cross-examine co-accused not breached where magistrate’s denial is not established.
|
22 March 1972 |
|
A ship is a dwelling for burglary; corporal punishment set aside as incompatible with Minimum Sentences Act discretion.
Criminal law – Burglary – section 294 Penal Code – vessel as dwelling – conviction on ship proper; Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act s.5(2) – limited discretion when finding special circumstances – cannot impose both imprisonment and corporal punishment.
|
22 March 1972 |
|
Appeal allowed where theft not proved beyond reasonable doubt and character evidence about poverty unduly prejudiced the trial.
Criminal law – theft from postal packets – proof beyond reasonable doubt – tracing missing money to accused; Evidence – tendency/character evidence – use of accused’s bank account and poverty to prove propensity to steal inadmissible and prejudicial; Criminal procedure – ancillary fraud/false accounting conviction dependent on proof of primary offence.
|
6 March 1972 |
|
Verbal provocation did not justify stabbing; conviction upheld, sentence reduced, compensation order maintained.
* Criminal law – Offence: causing grievous harm by stabbing – Eye‑witness evidence sustains conviction.
* Defences – Provocation: verbal provocation insufficient to justify use of a knife or to exculpate stabbing.
* Sentencing – appellate mitigation: conviction upheld but sentence reduced.
* Civil consequence – compensation order upheld and left undisturbed.
|
1 March 1972 |
|
Identification evidence at night, aided by a torch and a recovered garment, was sufficient to uphold a robbery conviction.
Criminal law – Robbery – Identification evidence at night – Face covered with kitenge – Sufficiency of identification where complainant had a torch and a distinctive description; recovered item (kitenge) linked to accused – Appeal dismissed.
|
1 March 1972 |
|
Conviction for violent robbery upheld; appellate court increases sentence for gravity and previous convictions, co‑accused to be heard.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Identification evidence corroborated by witness and medical reports – Conviction upheld. Sentencing – Adequacy of sentence – appellate court may enhance manifestly inadequate sentence; co‑accused must be given opportunity to show cause before enhancement.
|
1 March 1972 |
| February 1972 |
|
|
Accused’s open issuance and accounting for Party publications negated proof of theft; conviction and sentence quashed.
* Criminal law – Theft/appropriation – Whether issuance of Party publications to individuals without routing through Regional Secretaries constituted theft – Documentary evidence (letters, delivery notes) and accounting receipts as proof or rebuttal of criminal intent.
|
25 February 1972 |
|
Receipt discrepancies and a voluntary admission established clerk's forgery and theft; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Forgery – discrepancies between original and carbon duplicate receipts as evidence of deliberate falsification.
* Criminal law – Theft by public servant – cash-book entries and witness testimony proving shortfall.
* Evidence – voluntariness and admissibility of written confession made to supervisory officers.
* Sentencing – application of Minimum Sentences Act and statutory corporal punishment.
|
23 February 1972 |
|
Conviction for rape set aside due to ambiguous evidence lacking proof of penetration; retrial ordered.
Criminal law – Rape – Proof of penetration required; mere use of the word 'rape' without factual particulars is insufficient. Evidence – Ambiguous testimony by complainant undermines conviction. Appeals – Conviction and sentence may be set aside and case remitted for retrial where essential elements are not proved.
|
18 February 1972 |
|
Appeal dismissed: trial court’s rejection of accused’s theft explanation and imposed concurrent sentences upheld.
Criminal law – theft by public servant – failure to account for public funds – credibility of accused’s explanation of theft – appellate review of trial court’s findings of fact and sentence proportionality.
|
10 February 1972 |
|
High Court summarily dismissed the applicant’s appeal against convictions for forgery and stealing under section 317 CPC.
Criminal law – Appeal – Power under section 317 Criminal Procedure Code to summarily reject an appeal found to be without merit – Convictions for forgery and stealing.
|
9 February 1972 |
|
Conviction for stealing by agent affirmed; sentence increased to two years and 24 strokes for breach of trust involving church funds.
Criminal law – Stealing by agent (s273(b) Penal Code); sentencing – aggravation for breach of trust and misuse of charitable funds; Minimum Sentences Act – scheduled offences; property of missionary society (s261 Penal Code); corporal punishment pending commencement of new Act.
|
9 February 1972 |
| January 1972 |
|
|
|
29 January 1972 |
|
The applicant's appeal against convictions for malicious damage and unlawful wounding is summarily dismissed; convictions and sentence affirmed.
* Criminal law – Appeal – Convictions for malicious damage (s.326(1)) and unlawful wounding (s.227(1)) – Appellate review of record – memorandum of appeal found to raise no arguable doubt – conviction and sentence upheld.
* Procedure – Appellate power to summarily reject frivolous or unmeritorious appeals under Criminal Procedure Code (section 33.7).
|
29 January 1972 |
|
Appeals allowed: confused and insufficient evidence could not prove any appellant stole the co-operative’s funds.
Criminal law – Theft by servant – Sufficiency of evidence – Circumstantial evidence and access to funds – Convictions quashed where evidence is confused and cannot attribute loss to a specific accused.
|
26 January 1972 |
|
Conviction quashed for lack of proof of guilty knowledge; accomplice’s uncorroborated testimony insufficient; unlawful imprisonment set aside.
Criminal law – accomplice evidence – need for corroboration; knowledge/intention for aiding or abetting bribery; appellate rehearing on first appeal; sentencing limits under Minimum Sentences Act 1963 s.5(2).
|
26 January 1972 |
|
Burglary conviction upheld; irregular plea procedure condemned and burglary sentence ordered to run concurrently with theft sentence.
Criminal law – Burglary and theft – Evidence supporting conviction; Criminal procedure – Irregular plea-taking and recording of facts before related trial; Double jeopardy – Not tried twice where plea conviction and separate trial conviction on different counts; Sentencing – Concurrent sentences appropriate where offences arise from same transaction.
|
14 January 1972 |
|
|
10 January 1972 |
|
Conviction for theft upheld; Minimum Sentences Act mandates two-year imprisonment where stolen property exceeds Shs.100.
Theft by public servant; evidence on tampering sealed tanker compartments; Minimum Sentences Act 1963 — mandatory minimum imprisonment where value exceeds Shs.100; appellate substitution of sentence; corporal punishment retained.
|
7 January 1972 |
|
Appellate court upheld convictions but increased sentences to comply with the Minimum Sentences Act and reflect offence seriousness.
* Criminal law — Conviction on eyewitness and circumstantial evidence — appellate deference to trial credibility findings. * Sentencing — Minimum Sentences Act, 1963 — mandatory minimum where value threshold met; limited circumstances for reduction. * Criminal procedure — appellate power to increase sentence where trial court imposed insufficient punishment.
|
7 January 1972 |
|
|
7 January 1972 |
|
Appeal allowed where flawed identification evidence and ignored defence rendered convictions unsafe.
* Criminal law – identification parades – requirement to follow safeguards (REX v MWANGO) for reliable identification evidence
* Criminal law – identification evidence – prior acquaintance of witnesses and contradictory testimony can render identification unsafe
* Criminal procedure – appellate review – quashing conviction where prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to unreliable identification
* Trial fairness – duty to consider defence evidence properly
|
1 January 1972 |
|
|
1 January 1972 |
|
Whether the accused's push/assault caused the deceased's fatal head injury and whether the autopsy report was admissible under section 275(1).
* Criminal law – Manslaughter under s.95 Penal Code – causation and unlawful act leading to death. * Evidence – Eyewitness credibility and conflicting accounts. * Evidence – Admission of post-mortem report under s.275(1) Criminal Procedure Code (amendment) over defence objection. * Causation – whether fatal injury resulted from push by accused or from earlier fall from moving bus.
|
1 January 1972 |