Wakilii

Attorney General v Sandhu and Kaura (Criminal Appeal No. 563 of 1947. Case Stated)

East African Court of Appeal · [1948] EACA 59 · 1948 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Case stated by Resident Magistrate at instance of Attorney General on question of law
Decision
Order for compensation against Crown stands; order for costs set aside

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains 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 Court held that section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code authorises the award of compensation but not costs against the Crown for frivolous or vexatious charges. The words "in addition to his costs" in section 173 do not create a separate substantive provision for awarding costs under that section, but rather clarify that compensation under section 173 does not preclude an award of costs under section 171 where applicable. Costs can only be awarded against a private prosecutor under section 171, not against the Crown under section 173.

Outcome

Order for compensation against Crown stands; order for costs set aside

Facts

The Resident Magistrate at Nyeri dismissed a criminal charge against the two respondents and found the charge to be frivolous and vexatious. The Magistrate awarded both compensation and costs in favour of the accused and against the Crown under section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Attorney General took exception only to the order for payment of costs and stated a case to the Court of Appeal on the question whether section 173 empowered the Magistrate to award costs against the Crown. It was conceded that unless there be express statutory provision, costs cannot be awarded against the Crown.

Issues

  1. Whether a Resident Magistrate, having found a charge frivolous and vexatious, was empowered under section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code to award costs in favour of the accused and against the Crown.

Orders

  • Question answered in the negative.
  • Order for payment of costs made by the subordinate Court set aside.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Procedure — Costs — Award Against the Crown — Frivolous or Vexatious Charge
Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code authorises the award of compensation but not costs against the Crown where a charge is found to be frivolous or vexatious.
Statutory Interpretation — Criminal Procedure Code — Construction of Sections 171, 173 and 174
The words "in addition to his costs" in section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code do not create a separate substantive provision for awarding costs under that section, but clarify that an award of compensation under section 173 does not preclude an award of costs under section 171 where the accused is otherwise entitled to such costs against a private prosecutor.
Administrative Law — Crown Liability — Costs — Express Statutory Provision Required
Unless there be express statutory provision, costs cannot be awarded against the Crown.
Statutory Interpretation — Marginal Notes — Interpretive Value
The marginal note to a statutory provision may provide some indication of the draftsman's intention in construing the section.

Legislation cited (6)

  • Criminal Procedure Code s.173
  • Criminal Procedure Code s.171
  • Criminal Procedure Code s.172
  • Criminal Procedure Code s.174
  • Criminal Procedure Code s.331
  • Penal Code s.29

Cases cited (2)

  • R v Nadu Gurham (13 KLR 72)
  • R v Harrison Muini (18 KLR 51)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Attorney General v Sandhu and Kaura (Criminal Appeal No. 563 of 1947. Case Stated) [1948] EACA 59 (1 January 1948)
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.