Wakilii

Rex v Biagan (Cr. Case No. 48-1936)

East African Court of Appeal · [1936] EACA 142 · 1936 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal trial following re-opened preliminary inquiry under section 233 Criminal Procedure Code
Decision
Prosecution application to admit first statement refused

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

Where a preliminary inquiry is re-opened under section 233 Criminal Procedure Code and a second inquiry is held, only the accused's statement or evidence from the proceedings that resulted in committal is admissible at trial. A statement made at the first inquiry that resulted in nullity is not admissible where the accused made no statement at the second inquiry.

Outcome

Prosecution application to admit first statement refused

Facts

A preliminary inquiry was held on 11 March 1936 where the accused made a statement and was committed for trial on a murder charge. The Attorney General directed further investigation under section 233 Criminal Procedure Code. On 28 May 1936 the proceedings were re-opened and all depositions were recorded de novo. The accused made no statement at the second inquiry and was again committed for trial on a murder charge. At trial the prosecution sought to admit the statement made at the first preliminary inquiry.

Issues

  1. Whether a statement made by an accused person at a first preliminary inquiry is admissible at trial where the preliminary inquiry was re-opened under section 233 Criminal Procedure Code and the accused made no statement at the second inquiry.

Orders

  • Statement made by accused at first preliminary inquiry refused admission at trial.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Procedure — Preliminary Inquiry — Re-opened Proceedings — Admissibility of Statement from First Inquiry
Where a preliminary inquiry is re-opened under section 233 Criminal Procedure Code and a second inquiry is held at which the accused makes no statement, only the accused's statement or evidence from the proceedings which resulted in committal is admissible at trial under section 289 Criminal Procedure Code.
Evidence — Admissions and Confessions — Statement at Preliminary Inquiry — Effect of Re-opened Inquiry
A statement made by an accused person at a preliminary inquiry which results in nullity is not admissible at trial where a second inquiry is held and the accused makes no statement, as the accused is entitled to the benefit of his election not to make a statement at the second inquiry.
Criminal Procedure — Section 289 Criminal Procedure Code — Interpretation — Proceedings Resulting in Committal
On a strict interpretation of section 289 Criminal Procedure Code, only the accused's statement or evidence in the proceedings which resulted in committal should be read and put in at trial, not statements from earlier proceedings that resulted in nullity.

Legislation cited (3)

  • Criminal Procedure Code s.219
  • Criminal Procedure Code s.233
  • Criminal Procedure Code s.289

Cases cited (1)

  • R v Midagwe (2 EACA 74)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Biagan (Cr. Case No. 48-1936) [1936] EACA 142 (1 January 1936)
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.