Wakilii

Rex v Kara (Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 1944)

East African Court of Appeal · [1944] EACA 4 · 1944 Matter Remitted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from Resident Magistrate's Court by way of case stated on a question of law
Decision
Matter remitted to Resident Magistrate for determination according to law

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 held that the phrase 'on any pretence whatsoever' in regulation 15(1)(a) bears the widest possible meaning. Once an unauthorized person is proved to be in possession of military property, the regulation is contravened regardless of the reason, excuse, or manner of acquisition. Absence of deceit in obtaining possession does not afford a defence in law, though it may be relevant to sentencing. The possessor must prove they came into possession in one of the lawful ways specified in the regulation to avoid liability.

Outcome

Matter remitted to Resident Magistrate for determination according to law

Facts

The accused was charged with unlawful possession of a Service revolver under regulation 15(1)(a) of the Defence (His Majesty's Forces) Regulations 1941 on 12 March 1944 at Mombasa. The evidence showed the accused had received a War Department revolver from a sergeant of the Military Police for safe custody and retained it expecting the sergeant to collect it. The Resident Magistrate held that the word 'pretence' in the regulation implied deceit, and since the accused's manner of coming into possession involved no deceit, his possession was not unlawful. The prosecution contended that mere possession of military property by an unauthorized person constituted a breach. The Attorney General applied for a case stated on the question of statutory interpretation.

Issues

  1. Whether the word 'pretence' in regulation 15(1)(a) of the Defence (His Majesty's Forces) Regulations 1941 implies deceit of some sort, such that possession without deceit cannot constitute an offence.

Orders

  • Case remitted to the Magistrate with direction to proceed to determine the case according to law.
  • Magistrate to find on the facts what penalty, if any, should be imposed.

Rules and key headnotes

Statutory Interpretation — Criminal Statutes — Construction of 'On Any Pretence Whatsoever'
The phrase 'on any pretence whatsoever' in a criminal regulation bears the widest possible meaning and is not restricted to cases involving deceit or fraudulent conduct in the acquisition of property.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Unlawful Possession — Military Property — Elements of Offence
Under regulation 15(1)(a) of the Defence (His Majesty's Forces) Regulations 1941, proof of possession of military property by an unauthorized person is sufficient to establish the offence, whatever the reason, excuse, or pretext for such possession, unless the accused proves possession was obtained in one of the lawful ways specified in the regulation.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Defences — Good Faith and Absence of Deceit — Relevance to Guilt and Sentence
Proof that an accused employed no deceit in obtaining military property or intended to return it does not afford a defence in law to a charge of unlawful possession, though such circumstances may be relevant in mitigation of sentence.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Defence (His Majesty's Forces) Regulations 1941 reg.15(1)(a)
  • Penal Code s.36

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Kara (Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 1944) [1944] EACA 4 (1 January 1944)
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.