Wakilii

Rex v Gurham (Cr. App. 23-1931.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1931] EACA 22 · 1931 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from Magistrate's order awarding compensation under section 168 Criminal Procedure Code
Decision
Magistrate's order awarding compensation 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

Held that section 168 of the Criminal Procedure Code is a separate enactment giving the court power to award compensation to an accused person in cases where the charge was frivolous or vexatious, in addition to costs. The award of costs under section 166(2) is not a condition precedent to the award of compensation under section 168. Section 168 applies to any case and is not limited to cases initiated by a private prosecutor. The Magistrate's award of compensation was not irregular.

Outcome

Magistrate's order awarding compensation upheld

Facts

The appellant brought charges in the Second Class Magistrate's Court at Nairobi against certain persons under sections 84, 235, 252, and 310(1) of the Penal Code. The appellant gave evidence in support of the charges. The case was prosecuted through the Police. After the appellant gave evidence, the Police withdrew all charges. The Magistrate held that the charges were frivolous and vexatious and without foundation, ordered the accused discharged, and ordered the appellant to pay Sh. 150 compensation as part costs of the defence under section 168, or in default imprisonment for two months with hard labour. The appellant appealed the compensation order.

Issues

  1. Whether section 168 of the Criminal Procedure Code authorises an order for payment of compensation to an accused person where no order for costs has been made under section 166.
  2. Whether an order for costs under section 166(2) is a condition precedent to an order for compensation under section 168.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Procedure Code — Compensation for Frivolous or Vexatious Charges — Section 168
Section 168 of the Criminal Procedure Code is a separate enactment that gives the court power to award compensation to an accused person in cases where the charge was frivolous or vexatious, and such compensation may be awarded irrespective of whether costs have been ordered under section 166.
Criminal Procedure Code — Interpretation of Sections 166 and 168 — Independence of Provisions
An order for costs under section 166(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is not a condition precedent to an award of compensation under section 168. The two provisions are independent, and section 168 may be invoked regardless of whether section 166 applies.
Criminal Procedure Code — Section 168 — Application to Police Prosecutions
Section 168 of the Criminal Procedure Code is applicable to any case and is not limited to cases initiated by a private prosecutor. It may be applied even where the prosecution was conducted by the Police.

Legislation cited (6)

  • Criminal Procedure Code s.166
  • Criminal Procedure Code s.168
  • Penal Code s.84
  • Penal Code s.235
  • Penal Code s.252
  • Penal Code s.310(1)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Gurham (Cr. App. 23-1931.) [1931] EACA 22 (1 January 1931)
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.