Wakilii

Rex v Bulegeya (Criminal Appeal 12-1935.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1935] EACA 74 · 1935 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from High Court of Tanganyika murder conviction
Decision
Conviction upheld

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 of Appeal for Eastern Africa dismissed an appeal against a murder conviction. The court held that the appellant's intoxication did not afford an excuse in law. The court observed that the statutory statement made by the appellant before the Committing Magistrate should have been put in evidence, whether it spoke for or against the appellant, treating it as a statement rather than evidence.

Outcome

Conviction upheld

Facts

The appellant was convicted by the High Court of Tanganyika of murder. In his memorandum of appeal, the appellant submitted that he was drunk at the time of the incident and did not kill the deceased with whose murder he had been charged. The appellant appeared unrepresented before the Court of Appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the appellant's intoxication afforded an excuse in law for the killing.
  2. Whether the statutory statement of the accused before the Committing Magistrate should have been put in evidence.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Law & Procedure — Defences — Intoxication — Drunkenness as Excuse
Drunkenness in itself affords no excuse in law for a criminal act unless the intoxication is such as to negate the requisite mens rea for the offence charged.
Evidence — Criminal Procedure — Statement of Accused — Admissibility
The statutory statement of an accused person made before the Committing Magistrate at the preliminary inquiry should be put in evidence at trial, whether it speaks for or against the accused, treating it as a statement made by the accused rather than as evidence.

Cases cited (1)

  • Regina v Gardner [1899] 1 QB 150

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Bulegeya (Criminal Appeal 12-1935.) [1935] EACA 74 (1 January 1935)
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.