Wakilii

Asiimwe v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 200 of 2014)

Court of Appeal · [2015] UGCA 18 · 2015 Application Granted ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for bail pending appeal to the Court of Appeal
Decision
Bail granted pending hearing and determination of the criminal appeal, subject to conditions

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Sign in to read the full judgment

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The court applied the considerations for bail pending appeal stated in Arvind Patel v Uganda. The applicant was a first offender, the offence did not involve violence, the appeal had been admitted and was not frivolous with a reasonable possibility of success, and there was a likelihood of substantial delay in hearing the appeal owing to court backlog. The applicant also showed a fixed place of abode and substantial sureties. The court found it just and fair to admit the applicant to bail pending the determination of his appeal, subject to a cash deposit, sureties bonds and reporting conditions.

Facts

The applicant was remanded on 6 November 2012 on charges of theft contrary to sections 254(1) and 261 of the Penal Code Act. On 29 July 2013 he was convicted by a Magistrate Grade 1 at the LDC Court and sentenced to 36 months' imprisonment together with a refund order to the complainant. On appeal, the High Court confirmed the conviction, maintained the sentence and quashed the refund order on the ground that the amount of money involved was not ascertained. Dissatisfied, the applicant filed a notice and memorandum of appeal to the Court of Appeal and applied for bail pending that appeal. He contended he was a first offender, the offence did not involve violence, his appeal had reasonable prospects of success, he had a fixed place of abode and substantial sureties, was the sole breadwinner, and his appeal was likely to be delayed by court backlog.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant satisfied the considerations for the grant of bail pending appeal.

Orders

  • The applicant is granted bail pending appeal.
  • The applicant is to deposit the sum of Shs. 500,000/= cash in court.
  • The applicant is to produce two sureties who shall bond themselves in the sum of Shs. 5,000,000/= not cash.
  • The applicant shall report to the Registrar of the court every first Monday of the month until further notice.

Key headnotes

Criminal Procedure — Bail Pending Appeal — Applicable Considerations
An application for bail pending appeal is governed by considerations including the character of the applicant, whether the applicant is a first offender, whether the offence involved personal violence, whether the appeal is not frivolous and has a reasonable possibility of success, the possibility of substantial delay in determining the appeal, and the applicant's compliance with prior bail conditions.
Criminal Procedure — Bail Pending Appeal — Delay and First Offender Status
Where an applicant is a first offender convicted of a non-violent offence, the appeal has been admitted and is not frivolous with a reasonable possibility of success, and there is a likelihood of substantial delay in hearing the appeal due to court backlog, it is just and fair to admit the applicant to bail pending appeal on appropriate conditions.

Legislation cited (8)

  • Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 art.23(6)(a)
  • Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 art.28(8)(a)
  • Criminal Procedure Code Act (Cap.116) s.40
  • Criminal Procedure Code Act (Cap.116) s.47
  • Rules 6(2), 43(1), 43(2) and 44 of the Court of Appeal Rules S.I 13-10
  • Penal Code Act s.254(1)
  • Penal Code Act s.261
  • Trial on Indictments Act s.86

Cases cited (1)

  • Arvind Patel v Uganda (Criminal Application No. 1 of 2003)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.