Wakilii

Ntomi v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 21 of 1991)

Supreme Court · [1992] UGSC 18 · 1992 Appeal Allowed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from High Court conviction and sentence for murder
Decision
Conviction quashed and sentence set aside; matter remitted for retrial before another judge, appellant remanded in custody

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Sign in to read the full judgment
Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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 Supreme Court held that where the substance of the appellant's instructions, revealed in cross-examination, challenged a charge and caution statement as concocted, the trial judge should have held a trial within a trial to determine its admissibility before it was read out in court. The confession having been wrongly admitted, only the dying declaration remained, and the corroboration relied on was found in medical evidence that was itself improperly admitted. There was accordingly no proper trial and the appellant was wrongly convicted. The Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, set aside the sentence and ordered a retrial before another judge.

Facts

The appellant was tried and convicted in the High Court at Fort Portal for the murder of Selegio Asingoma, contrary to section 183 of the Penal Code. The conviction rested on an alleged confession by the appellant (a charge and caution statement) and the dying declaration of the deceased, with corroboration said to be found in the medical post mortem report. Counsel for the appellant allowed the charge and caution statement to be admitted without objection, but then cross-examined the recording police officer in a manner showing that the appellant's instructions were that the statement had been concocted by the officer.

Issues

  1. Whether the appellant received a fair trial where his charge and caution statement (confession) was admitted without objection and without a trial within a trial, despite cross-examination indicating the statement was concocted.
  2. Whether the dying declaration of the deceased was properly corroborated where the supporting medical evidence had itself been improperly admitted.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Conviction quashed.
  • Sentence set aside.
  • Retrial ordered before another Judge.
  • Appellant remanded in custody in the meantime.

Key headnotes

Evidence — Confessions — Admissibility — Trial within a trial
Where the line of cross-examination shows that an accused's instructions are that a charge and caution statement was concocted, the admissibility of that statement must be determined in a trial within a trial, which must be held before the statement is read out in court rather than after.
Evidence — Dying declarations — Corroboration
A dying declaration requires corroboration, and such corroboration cannot validly be drawn from medical evidence that has itself been improperly admitted.
Criminal Procedure — Fair trial — Effect of improperly admitted evidence
Where a confession is wrongly admitted without a trial within a trial and the only remaining evidence is a dying declaration lacking proper corroboration, there has been no proper trial and the resulting conviction cannot stand.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Penal Code Act s.183
  • Trial on Indictments Decree s.64

Cases cited (1)

  • Bikuiau vs. Uganda Criminal Appeal 24/89
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.