Wakilii

Rex v Lugulula (Cr. App. No. 73 of .1938.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1938] EACA 113 · 1938 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from conviction for murder by the High Court of Tanganyika
Decision
Appellant's conviction for murder upheld; case recommended for executive clemency consideration

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 held that the killing was murder. The appellant had no lawful claim to the deceased as they were not married according to native law or any other law. Even assuming the appellant discovered the deceased in flagrante delicto with another man, that fact could not constitute provocation in law because the parties were not married. Additionally, the two-hour interval between the alleged discovery and the killing meant the act was not committed in the first transport of passion.

Outcome

Appellant's conviction for murder upheld; case recommended for executive clemency consideration

Facts

The appellant Ali s/o Lugulula killed his mistress Lemi binti Mazika on 26 January 1938 at Gegeshi, Kahama District. The appellant and Lemi were staying in the hut of the appellant's brother Kasule. On the morning in question, the appellant left the hut at dawn. Upon his return approximately 30-45 minutes later, he claimed to have found Kasule and Lemi in the act of sexual intercourse. The appellant attempted to attack Kasule with a bow and arrow, but Kasule fled to seek help. The appellant remained alone with Lemi in the hut for approximately two hours without harming her. When Kasule returned with others, the appellant emerged, shot an arrow at Kasule, pursued and wounded him. The appellant then returned to the hut, chased Lemi when she fled, overtook her, and killed her by inflicting twenty-two wounds. The appellant and Lemi were not married according to native custom or any other law, and no dowry had been paid. She was his mistress.

Issues

  1. Whether the killing of a mistress found in flagrante delicto with another man constitutes murder or manslaughter.
  2. Whether provocation in law applies where the deceased was not the appellant's lawful wife according to native law or any other law.
  3. Whether a two-hour interval between discovery and killing negates the defence of sudden provocation.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Conviction for murder upheld.
  • Case recommended for consideration by His Excellency the Governor in Council.

Rules and key headnotes

Murder — Provocation — Adultery — Requirement of Lawful Marriage
The defence of provocation reducing murder to manslaughter on grounds of discovering a sexual partner in flagrante delicto applies only where the parties are lawfully married according to native law or any other law; it does not apply to a man who kills his mistress with whom he has no lawful marital relationship.
Murder — Provocation — Sudden Passion — Cooling-Off Period
Where an accused person remains alone with the alleged adulteress for approximately two hours after the alleged discovery without harming her, and only kills her after pursuing and wounding another person, the killing is not committed in the first transport of passion and cannot be reduced to manslaughter on grounds of provocation.
Murder — Provocation — Misdirected Passion
Passion felt towards one person is no excuse for killing another person; where an accused's fury is inspired by one individual, that fury cannot be gratified at the expense of a different individual even if both were involved in the same alleged wrongdoing.

Legislation cited (1)

  • Penal Code s.186

Cases cited (1)

  • Russell on Crimes 8th Ed. at p. 662

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Lugulula (Cr. App. No. 73 of .1938.) [1938] EACA 113 (1 January 1938)
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.