Wakilii

Mugerwa and Another v Uganda (URA) (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 5 of 2022)

Supreme Court · [2023] UGSC 25 · 2023 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application by a single justice for bail pending the hearing and determination of a criminal appeal to the Supreme Court
Decision
Applicants released on bail pending the hearing and determination of their appeal, on stringent 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

On an application for bail pending a second appeal, the single justice held that bail pending appeal requires exceptional and unusual circumstances because the applicant is no longer wholly protected by the presumption of innocence and is presumed to have been properly convicted. Applying the Arvind Patel guidelines, the Court found that the absence of the record of appeal and the scanty Court of Appeal judgment prevented any assessment of the appeal's prospects, and that no unusual delay or urgent medical need was shown. Nonetheless, the applicants' good character, first-offender status, prior compliance with bail conditions and substantial sureties together sufficed, and bail was granted on stringent conditions.

Outcome

Applicants released on bail pending the hearing and determination of their appeal, on stringent conditions

Facts

The applicants were employees of the Uganda Revenue Authority; the first was a supervisor and the second a revenue officer responsible for verifying and approving taxpayers' VAT refund claims. In 2014 they approved impugned payments resulting in a loss of about six billion shillings to URA. They were charged in the High Court Anti-Corruption Division and, on 6 November 2015, convicted by Mugamba J of abuse of office, causing financial loss and false claims by officials, and sentenced to concurrent terms of 5, 10 and 2 years. The Court of Appeal dismissed their appeal and confirmed the sentences on 3 December 2021. They further appealed to the Supreme Court and, pending that appeal, applied to a single justice for bail. They relied on their good character, first-offender status, the non-violent nature of the offences, prior compliance with bail conditions in the lower courts, chronic ill-health and the availability of substantial sureties.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants, having been convicted by the High Court and the Court of Appeal, established the exceptional and unusual circumstances required to justify the grant of bail pending the determination of their appeal to the Supreme Court.

Orders

  • Each applicant to deposit UGX 10,000,000 in cash in Court.
  • Each surety to bind themselves in the sum of UGX 50,000,000 (non-cash).
  • The Registrar to cause transfer of the applicants' deposited security properties and passports from the lower court to the custody of this Court until the appeal is determined.
  • Each applicant to report to the Registrar on the last working day of every month until the appeal is disposed of or the order is varied.
  • The Registrar to fix the appeal for disposal as soon as practicable.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail Pending Appeal — Exceptional and Unusual Circumstances
Bail pending appeal will only be granted where exceptional and unusual circumstances exist, because a convicted applicant is no longer wholly shielded by the presumption of innocence and is presumed to have been properly convicted, that presumption being rebuttable only by factual evidence.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail Pending Appeal — Arvind Patel Guidelines
The factors governing bail pending appeal are the applicant's character, whether they are a first offender, whether the offence involved personal violence, whether the appeal is not frivolous and has a reasonable prospect of success, the possibility of substantial delay in determining the appeal, and compliance with bail conditions after conviction; not all factors need be present, as two or three may suffice.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail Pending Appeal — Assessing Prospects of Success Without the Record
A court can only assess the possibility of an appeal succeeding by perusing the record of proceedings, the judgment appealed from and the memorandum of appeal; where the record of appeal is missing and the impugned judgment is incomplete, the prospects of success cannot be evaluated and that consideration weighs against the applicant.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail Pending Appeal — Delay as an Exceptional Circumstance
Delay can constitute an exceptional or unusual circumstance only where it is itself unusual, assessed by whether there is a real risk that the sentence, or a substantial portion of it, will have been served before the appeal is heard; speculative assertions of delay are insufficient.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail Pending Appeal — Ill-Health
Ill-health will not ground bail pending appeal where the applicant fails to show that the prison medical facility lacks capacity to manage the condition or that the illness requires urgent attention.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail — Fresh Application After Earlier Refusal by a Single Justice
An applicant whose earlier bail application was refused by a single justice may bring a fresh bail application before another single justice without seeking to vary, challenge or refer the earlier decision.

Legislation cited (14)

Cases cited (8)

  • Arvind Patel v Uganda (Criminal Application No. 1 of 2003)
  • Alenyo Mark v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 5 of 2015)
  • Kyeyune Mitala Julius v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 4 of 2017)
  • Kiwanuka Kunsa Stephen v Uganda (Criminal Application No. 4 of 2022)
  • Mugerwa Dominic and Muhwezi Abias v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 15 of 2021)
  • Henry Bamutura v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 19 of 2019)
  • Chimambai v Republic (No.2) [1971] EA 343
  • Kashaka Vs Uganda (supra)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mugerwa and Another v Uganda (URA) (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 5 of 2022) [2023] UGSC 25 (16 May 2023)
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.