|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1978 |
|
|
Appeal against conviction for escaping lawful custody summarily dismissed under s.317(1)(c) for lacking sufficient grounds.
* Criminal procedure – Appeal – Summary dismissal under s.317(1)(c) Criminal Procedure Code – Appeal lacking sufficient ground of complaint.
* Criminal law – Offence – Escaping from lawful custody – appeal against conviction summarily rejected.
|
27 December 1978 |
|
Divorce upheld where respondent's violent cruelty rendered marriage irretrievably broken and appellant was competent at hearing.
Matrimonial law – Divorce for cruelty – Competence of petitioner at hearing – Evidence of attempted physical harm (panga/knife), binding with wire and serious insults – Irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
|
24 December 1978 |
|
Appeal dismissed: reliable identification and weak alibis upheld; statutory minimum sentences lawful; spouse compellable; prosecutors may not demand sentences.
Criminal law – shop breaking and stealing – identification evidence by a known witness on a moonlit night; Alibi – requirements for acceptance; Sentencing – statutory minimums and effect of property-value thresholds under the Minimum Sentences Act; Evidence Act s.130 – compellability of spouse when called by accused; Role of prosecutor – limited to laying facts, no right to demand sentence.
|
20 December 1978 |
|
A court must give an accused an opportunity to show cause before disqualifying them from holding a driving licence.
Road Traffic Act — disqualification from licence is a penalty — court must call accused to show cause before ordering disqualification — audi alteram partem — accused should not be assumed to know s.27(1) rights.
|
20 December 1978 |
|
Conviction for theft by a public servant upheld; sentence increased to statutory minimum due to amount stolen.
Criminal law – Stealing by public servant (Penal Code ss. 265, 270) – evidentiary weight of exhibit and safe register entries; inference from unexplained register innovation; distinction between deliberate theft and negligence (s.284A); unproven allegations of conspiracy/bias; sentencing – application of statutory minimum sentence for amounts exceeding threshold (s.5(d)).
|
18 December 1978 |
|
Public servant convicted of stealing from custody; register anomalies showed intentional theft; sentence raised to statutory minimum.
Criminal law – Stealing by public servant – Evidentiary weight of exhibit and safe registers – Unexplained register entries (‘sent to court’) as indicia of dishonesty – Distinction between negligence (s.284A Penal Code) and deliberate theft – Minimum Sentences Act s.5(d) mandatory minimum where amount exceeds Shs.5,000 – Unproven allegations of bias and conspiracy do not raise reasonable doubt.
|
18 December 1978 |
|
Appeal dismissed: conviction for theft by a public servant upheld and sentence increased to statutory minimum.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – exhibit and safe register entries as key evidence – unexplained deviation from usual recording practice implies concealment and intent; negligence (s.284A) distinguished from deliberate theft; Minimum Sentences Act s.5(d) – statutory minimum applies where amount stolen exceeds threshold; unproven allegations of conspiracy and judicial bias do not vitiate conviction.
|
18 December 1978 |
|
Conviction for stealing by a public servant quashed due to evidential doubts and sentencing/charging irregularities.
Criminal law – Stealing by public servant – Correct charging where contents (money) are alleged – Wrong sections curable under s.346 CPC – Minimum Sentences Act requires absolute ownership by specified authority – Single-witness inconsistencies and delays can create reasonable doubt – Appeal allowed and conviction quashed.
|
13 December 1978 |
| November 1978 |
|
|
Convictions and concurrent sentences for false accounting and stealing upheld; defective particulars curable and handwriting expert’s excess did not vitiate evidence.
Criminal law – fraudulent false accounting and stealing by servant – sufficiency of evidence; handwriting expert evidence – limits on positive authorship assertions; defective particulars – curability under s.346 Criminal Procedure Code; appellate review of statutory and discretionary sentences.
|
20 November 1978 |
|
Court upheld convictions and statutory sentences; defective particulars were curable and did not vitiate convictions.
Criminal law – Fraudulent false accounting (s.317(b)) – distinction between ‘deceive’ and ‘defraud’ – particulars of offence – curable under s.346 CrPC; Criminal law – Stealing by servant (ss.265, 271) – statutory minimum sentences; Evidence – admissibility and limits of handwriting expert opinion; Appeal – sufficiency of evidence and review of sentence.
|
20 November 1978 |
|
Recent-possession convictions unsafe where court fails to decide whether accused are thieves or receivers and inadequately assesses their explanations.
* Criminal law – theft – Doctrine of recent possession – Court must determine and state whether accused guilty of stealing or receiving stolen property – Need for reasons.
* Criminal procedure – evaluation of defence – Absence of independent witness to handing-over not decisive – adverse inference where co-accused absconds.
* Evidence – credibility – possibility of corroboration by absent co-accused undermines safety of conviction.
|
20 November 1978 |
|
Appellants’ convictions quashed where documentary and testimonial evidence was inconsistent, insufficient and failed to establish fraudulent misappropriation.
Criminal law – fraud and theft charges – adequacy and consistency of documentary and witness evidence – necessity of proving origin and linkage of accounting entries, muster roll and P.V. to cheque payments – appellate intervention where evidence is self‑defeating or trial magistrate misdirected.
|
13 November 1978 |
|
Appellate court upheld arson conviction and four-year sentence, finding eyewitness ID credible and night commission aggravating.
Criminal law – arson – identification evidence and eyewitness credibility – assessment of defence witness contradictions – sentencing: night-time commission as aggravating factor; appellate review of conviction and sentence.
|
13 November 1978 |
|
Acquittal upheld where defects in cash‑box, multiple access and withheld fingerprint report created reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – stealing by public servant (c/s 265 & 270) – proof beyond reasonable doubt required – defects in exhibit and multiple access raise reasonable doubt. * Criminal law – negligence under s.284A(1) – burden to prove negligence; operational practice and shared access may negate negligence. * Evidence – inadmissibility of unsigned police message under s.154B; adverse inference for withheld evidence (Evidence Act s.122).
|
3 November 1978 |
|
Prosecution's failure to cross‑examine the accused and his witness rendered the conviction unsafe and unsupported.
* Criminal law – Stealing by agent (s. 273(b)) – sufficiency of evidence – effect of prosecution's failure to cross‑examine accused and witness; burden of proof; reasonable doubt.
|
3 November 1978 |
|
Appeal allowed where respondent's contradictory evidence and an inadmissible document failed to prove the claimed loan balance.
Civil appeal – burden of proof on balance of probabilities – credibility of witnesses – material inconsistencies in testimony – hearsay and inadmissible documentary evidence – trial court's erroneous admission of document – appeal allowed.
|
3 November 1978 |
|
Primary court lacked jurisdiction because customary law was inapplicable; proceedings declared nullity; refile in District Court.
Jurisdiction — Application of customary law — Sections 9(1)(a) and 9(2)(a) Judicature and Application of Laws Ordinance (as amended) — Membership of community by adoption or acceptance — Primary (Urban) Court jurisdiction — Nullity of proceedings.
|
1 November 1978 |
| October 1978 |
|
|
|
25 October 1978 |
|
Whether misdescription of the owner in shop-breaking particulars invalidates conviction or affects appropriate sentence.
Criminal law – shop-breaking (s.296(1) Penal Code) – particulars misstating ownership – sufficiency of evidence of breaking and removal – effect on conviction and sentencing.
|
22 October 1978 |
|
Possession of recently stolen property establishes culpability; burglary conviction varied to entering with intent (s.295); concurrent sentences upheld.
* Criminal law – Possession of recently stolen property – Possession without satisfactory explanation supports conviction as thief or guilty receiver. * Criminal law – Burglary (s.294(1)) – Requirement to prove breaking – where breaking not proved, conviction may be varied to entering with intent (s.295). * Sentencing – Concurrent terms; appellate review of excessiveness for first offender.
|
16 October 1978 |
|
Prosecution failed to prove theft beyond reasonable doubt due to identification gaps, missing witnesses, and unverified serial-number evidence.
* Criminal law – Theft by servant – burden of proof – identification of property – need for positive proof that recovered item belongs to employer; importance of producing corroborative exhibits or conducting inspection to verify serial numbers. * Evidence – failure to call key witnesses (co-worker, watchman) and absence of evidence about access/keys undermines opportunity proof. * Criminal procedure – duty of trial court under s.171(1) CrPC to make specific findings on disputed identification; appellant’s cross‑examination after s.206 election shows he did not ‘‘say nothing.’’ * Sentencing – consideration of s.5 Minimum Sentences Act where accused is first offender.
|
16 October 1978 |
|
Conviction for corruption quashed where prosecution failed to prove recipient had relevant official duties.
Criminal law – Corruption/bribery – s.3(2) Prevention of Corruption Act – requirement that recipient have relevant official duties – insufficiency of evidence; appellate relief by quashing where conviction unsafe.
|
15 October 1978 |
|
Admission of luggage ownership is not a confession; convictions upheld but sentences reduced for lack of trophy valuation.
Criminal law – evidence – distinction between admission of property ownership and confession; discovery of incriminating items in baggage does not equal confession. Sentencing – mitigation where prosecution fails to prove weight/value of government trophy.
|
14 October 1978 |
|
Omnibus sentence unlawful; appellate court substituted burglary/theft conviction with receiving stolen property and imposed three-year sentence.
Criminal law – omnibus sentences unlawful where multiple convictions; possession and unexplained receipt of stolen property gives rise to presumption of theft or guilty receiving; appellate substitution of conviction to receiving stolen property (s.311(1)); sentencing implications and Minimum Sentences Act considerations.
|
2 October 1978 |
|
The appellant's conviction quashed for failure to link recovered items to the stolen property.
Criminal law – Store-breaking and stealing – Circumstantial evidence and identification of stolen property – Possession of property parts – Prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt – Conviction cannot be founded on weakness of defence; misdirection vitiates conviction.
|
2 October 1978 |
| September 1978 |
|
|
Primary Court lacks jurisdiction where the claimed debt exceeds the Shs 1,000 ceiling; appeal dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure — jurisdiction — Primary Court jurisdictional monetary ceiling (Shs 1,000) — proceedings exceeding jurisdiction are nullity — appellate review of jurisdictional findings.
|
29 September 1978 |
|
Failure to convict before sentencing vitiates the sentence; an unequivocal guilty plea permits conviction and a s.305 bond for a young first offender.
Criminal procedure – conviction must precede sentence – non-compliance with s.203(2) CPC vitiates sentence; unequivocal guilty plea may support conviction by appellate court; s.305 CPC release on bond for young first offender.
|
25 September 1978 |
|
The applicant's appeal against conviction and mandatory three-year sentence for shopbreaking and stealing is dismissed.
Criminal law – shopbreaking and stealing; identification evidence at night by known witnesses; credibility and absence of collusion; Minimum Sentences Act – mandatory minimum custody upheld.
|
5 September 1978 |
|
Appellate court upheld conviction and mandatory three-year sentence based on credible night identification and corroborative evidence.
* Criminal Law – Shopbreaking and stealing – proof beyond reasonable doubt; identification evidence at night; credibility of eyewitnesses. * Evidence – Identification – previous acquaintance and moonlight identification; cross-examination did not shake evidence. * Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act – mandatory three-year sentence upheld. * Appeal – appellate court affirms conviction and sentence where trial court credibility findings are reasonable.
|
5 September 1978 |
| August 1978 |
|
|
Absence of the other driver’s evidence does not preclude conviction; driving disqualification reduced to 12 months.
* Criminal law/Traffic offences – conviction upheld despite absence of other driver’s evidence – uncontested sketch plan and prosecution evidence sufficient.
* Evidence – failure to dispute or contradict prosecution’s sketch plan and evidence precludes shifting blame to absent witness.
* Sentencing – abrupt conduct of another driver may mitigate but does not vitiate criminal liability; disqualification period reduced for clean record.
|
24 August 1978 |
|
Identification evidence sustained conviction for possession of ten tusks; conviction for two ceiling tusks was unsafe and varied.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — Credibility of eyewitness and police testimony; Possession — proof of possession of illegally obtained trophies; Appeal — when contradictions render prosecution evidence unsafe; Sentencing — appellate interference with sentence.
|
18 August 1978 |
|
Appellants' convictions for demanding property with menaces upheld; third appellant's sentence reduced for lesser culpability.
Criminal law – demand with menaces (s.292 Penal Code) – successful demand may amount to stealing (s.265) – participation/abetment (s.22(c)) – credibility of local witnesses – improper elicitation of bad character evidence by trial court.
|
18 August 1978 |
|
Conviction for store‑breaking and stealing varied to receiving stolen property where evidence of breaking was inconclusive.
* Criminal law – Theft and breaking – Whether evidence established breaking-in versus an inside job.
* Criminal law – Receiving stolen property – Conviction may be substituted where evidence of breaking-in is lacking but accused found in possession of stolen goods.
* Criminal procedure – Appellate variation of conviction and setting aside ancillary orders (compensation).
* Sentencing – Appeal against sentence; five years not manifestly excessive in deterrence of receivers of stolen property.
|
18 August 1978 |
|
Conviction for theft by a public servant upheld; hostile-witness procedure flawed but not prejudicial; compensation order may not be postponed.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Credibility findings and sufficiency of evidence; Criminal procedure – Treatment of witness as hostile and procedure for proving prior inconsistent statements; Sentencing – Compensation orders under the Minimum Sentences Act cannot be postponed.
|
18 August 1978 |
|
Appeal dismissed; conviction for stealing by a public servant affirmed based on voluntary admissions and corroborative evidence.
Criminal law – Stealing by a public servant (Penal Code ss. 265, 270) – Proof of receipt and conversion – Occurrence Book entries and signatures as evidence – Voluntariness of admissions – Alleged conspiracy and duress assessed against corroborative witness testimony.
|
18 August 1978 |
| July 1978 |
|
|
Whether the appellant knowingly received property stolen from an educational institution; conviction upheld, sentence reduced to six months.
* Criminal law – Receiving stolen property – Proof of knowledge or reason to believe – Identification marks on property as proof of provenance; hostile prosecution witness previously admitting theft; credibility of defence explanation. * Evidence – Treatment of hostile witnesses and sufficiency of independent corroboration. * Sentencing – First offender discretion; dispensing with mandatory minimum provisions where appropriate.
|
10 July 1978 |
| June 1978 |
|
|
Insufficient proof of breaking negated burglary; conviction substituted and sentence reduced.
Criminal law – Burglary – necessity of proving unlawful breaking or forceful entry; evidence – sufficiency and independent corroboration; police duty – value of scene inspection to establish breaking; theft versus receiving stolen property; sentencing – substitution to lesser offence (s.295 Penal Code) where breaking unproved.
|
26 June 1978 |
|
Conviction unsafe where recent possession, accomplice testimony and auction receipt were unexplained; conviction quashed.
Criminal law – Cattle theft – recent possession doctrine – adequacy of proof to show accused was actual thief versus receiver – accomplice evidence requiring corroboration – failure to produce crucial documentary evidence (auction receipt) – conviction unsafe and quashed.
|
21 June 1978 |
|
Appeal dismissed where eyewitness identification and corroborating purchaser testimony proved theft beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – Theft (cattle/goats) – Identification evidence – Eyewitness seen thief in daylight and later identified him – Corroboration by purchaser who bought stolen animals shortly after the theft. * Credibility findings – appellate interference inappropriate where trial court made reasoned credibility findings. * Sentence – minimum term under Minimum Sentences Act upheld.
|
21 June 1978 |
|
Appeal dismissed where appellant had opportunity to call witnesses and lower courts’ credibility findings were upheld.
Civil appeal – proof of customary payment (cow/bull) in courtship – assessment of credibility – right to call witnesses – appellate interference with findings of fact.
|
20 June 1978 |
|
Conviction quashed where only co-accused was shown to have stolen the cattle and no evidence linked the appellant.
Criminal law – theft – sufficiency of evidence to prove complicity; joint charges – where one accused admits theft but no evidence links the co-accused; convictions unsafe if no independent proof of participation.
|
19 June 1978 |
|
Claim for replacement or refund of bridewealth dismissed where applicant accepted carcass and conduct showed lack of intention to honour obligations.
Customary marriage practices; bridewealth (cow) died—dispute over delivery of carcass; credibility of witnesses; conduct and acceptance as estoppel to claim replacement; appellate review of trial findings.
|
15 June 1978 |
|
Appeal allowed where identification of stolen cattle was unreliable; conviction quashed for failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Cattle theft – Identification of stolen animals by skins and features – Reliability of visual identification without stamped marks – Standard of proof: guilt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt – Conviction must rest on prosecution’s strong case, not on weakness of defence.
|
14 June 1978 |
|
Conviction of the applicant was unsafe where absence of receipts and unverified returns left reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – sufficiency of evidence – absence of receipts and returns not necessarily conclusive proof of theft. * Administrative procedure – standing orders and circulars (S.O.11; DG 18/3/3) require remittance at next staffed station and verification by booking clerks. * Proof beyond reasonable doubt – shared dereliction of duty can render conviction unsafe.
|
14 June 1978 |
|
Appeal against conviction is incompetent after a guilty plea; unproved prior convictions cannot be used to increase sentence.
* Criminal law – plea of guilty – appeal against conviction – s.313(1) Criminal Procedure Code – appeal incompetent except as to extent or legality of sentence.
* Sentencing – previous convictions – prior conviction not admitted or proved under s.143 Criminal Procedure Code cannot be considered when determining sentence.
* Remedy – sentence reduction where improper consideration of unproved prior conviction influenced sentence.
|
14 June 1978 |
|
Appeal allowed: convictions quashed for failure to prove ownership and identification of seized cattle beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Theft – Proof of ownership and identification of stolen goods – Non-production of seized property affects weight, not admissibility, of evidence – Burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt – Appellate review of trial magistrate’s inferences.
|
7 June 1978 |
|
Appeal allowed: convictions quashed where trial court failed to properly assess conflicting identification and defence evidence.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Night-time recognition by torchlight and familiarity – Necessity to resolve contradictions in identification evidence before convicting.
* Criminal procedure – Evaluation of evidence – Trial court must review and assess defence case and explain rejection of conflicting testimony.
* Appeal – Conviction unsafe where identity is central and material contradictions remain unresolved.
|
7 June 1978 |
|
Unrefuted eyewitness and possession evidence upheld robbery conviction and mandatory seven-year minimum sentence.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence; evidential sufficiency – eyewitness identification, prompt complaint, post-offence possession and pawning of stolen property as corroboration; sentencing – mandatory minimum seven-year term for scheduled offence under the Minimum Sentences Law.
|
5 June 1978 |
| May 1978 |
|
|
Uncontradicted prosecution evidence and failure to cross‑examine justified summary dismissal of appeal for stealing by servant.
Criminal law – Stealing by servant; appellate review – sufficiency of evidence; failure to cross‑examine adverse witness; summary dismissal and certificate of unarguable appeal.
|
30 May 1978 |
|
Appellate court upheld cattle-stealing convictions, finding witness credibility sufficient and inconsistencies not creating reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – cattle stealing – assessment of witness credibility and identification – inconsistencies in evidence and reasonable doubt – statutory minimum sentence and appellate power to alter sentence.
|
29 May 1978 |