Wakilii

Kahasa Milton v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 53 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 826 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for bail pending trial on a charge of aggravated defilement
Decision
Applicant released on bail pending trial subject to conditions

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

Held that the applicant, aged 62 years and charged with aggravated defilement, satisfied the exceptional circumstances requirement for bail on a capital offence by reason of advanced age as defined in the Bail Guidelines. The court found that the applicant had substantial sureties, a fixed place of abode, and was unlikely to abscond. Bail was granted subject to conditions including a cash bond and monthly reporting requirements.

Outcome

Applicant released on bail pending trial subject to conditions

Facts

The applicant was indicted on one count of aggravated defilement contrary to section 116(3)(4)(a) and (c) of the Penal Code Act. He applied for bail pending trial. The applicant was 62 years old at the time of the application, born on 12th November 1963. He presented three sureties: Tumwine Richard (aged 47, maternal uncle), Bejjura Duncan (aged 61, cousin), and Asiimwe James (aged 39, friend and neighbour). All sureties were residents of Rakai District. The applicant claimed to reside at Kenjoki Village, Kirangira Parish, Kasankara Sub County, Rakai District. He also claimed to suffer from pneumonia but the medical reports were from Kagamba Health Centre II and not certified by a prison medical officer.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be granted bail pending trial on a capital offence.
  2. Whether the applicant satisfied the requirements for bail including provision of substantial sureties and a fixed place of abode.
  3. Whether exceptional circumstances existed to warrant the grant of bail for a capital offence.

Orders

  • Application for bail granted.
  • The Applicant is bonded in the sum of UGX 3,000,000 cash.
  • Each surety for the Applicant is bonded to a tune of UGX 5,000,000 non-cash.
  • The Applicant shall report to the Deputy Registrar of the High Court of Uganda at Masaka once every month with effect from 29th September 2025 till the disposal of the main criminal case.

Rules and key headnotes

Bail — Capital Offences — Exceptional Circumstances — Advanced Age
Under the Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2022, a court shall only grant bail where an applicant is accused of a capital offence in exceptional circumstances, which include advanced age defined as sixty years of age and above.
Bail — Judicial Discretion — Balancing Interests
The grant of bail is an exercise of judicial discretion that must be exercised judiciously, taking into consideration the unique circumstances of each case and creating a balance between the interests of the accused person and those of society.
Bail — Suitability of Sureties — Factors for Consideration
When determining the suitability of a surety, the court shall take into account the age of the surety, work and residence address, character and antecedents, relationship to the accused person, and any other factor that the court may deem fit.
Bail — Grave Illness — Certification Requirement
Grave illness as an exceptional circumstance for bail in capital offences must be certified by a medical officer of the prison or other institution where an applicant is being detained as being incapable of adequate medical treatment while the applicant is in custody.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (11)

  • R v Wilkes (1770) 4 Burr 2527
  • Gardner v Jay (1885) 29 Ch 50
  • Parimal v Veena alias Bhart (2011) 3 SCC 345
  • Foundation for Human Rights Initiatives v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 20 of 2006)
  • Uganda (DPP) v Col. (RTD) Dr. Kiiza Besigye (Constitutional Reference No. 20 of 2005)
  • Lawrence Luzinda v Uganda (1986) HCB 33
  • Joseph Tushabe v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 6 of 2004)
  • Magombe Joshua v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 11 of 2019)
  • Nasasira Hannington & 2 Others v Uganda (Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 56 of 2019)
  • Bongomin Richard Akal v Uganda (High Court Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 37 of 2008)
  • Byamukama Abel & Another v Uganda (Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 3 of 2020)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kahasa Milton v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 53 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 826 (29 August 2025)
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.