Wakilii

Rex v Ongiro (Cr. App. No. 116 of 1938.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1938] EACA 111 · 1938 Conviction Reduced to Manslaughter AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from conviction of murder by the High Court of Uganda
Decision
Murder conviction reduced to manslaughter; appellant sentenced to 6 years hard labour

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 provocation in law does not require the provoking acts to have been done in the accused's presence. Where a person receives information and immediately sees circumstances confirming it, acting on reasonable belief may constitute grave and sudden provocation. The appellant, upon being informed and finding his nephew unconscious with the deceased standing over him with a stick, acted under honest and reasonable belief sufficient to reduce murder to manslaughter.

Outcome

Murder conviction reduced to manslaughter; appellant sentenced to 6 years hard labour

Facts

The appellant was informed that his nephew, to whom he stood in loco parentis, had been harmed. He immediately went to the location where he found his nephew lying unconscious on the ground with the deceased Aupale standing nearby holding a stick. The appellant ran into a nearby house, retrieved his spear, and plunged it into Aupale's stomach, killing him. No wrongful act by Aupale had been committed in the appellant's presence. The appellant was convicted of murder by the High Court of Uganda and appealed.

Issues

  1. Whether provocation in law requires that the provoking acts be committed in the presence of the accused.
  2. Whether the appellant acted under grave and sudden provocation when he killed the deceased after finding his nephew unconscious.

Orders

  • Conviction of murder altered to manslaughter.
  • Appellant sentenced to 6 years hard labour.

Rules and key headnotes

Murder — Provocation — Presence of Accused Not Essential
In order to establish provocation in law sufficient to reduce murder to manslaughter, it is not essential that the acts constituting the provocation be done in the presence of the accused person.
Provocation — Information Conveyed and Confirmed by Observation
Where a person has information conveyed to him and at the time or immediately afterwards sees a state of affairs giving reasonable ground for believing in the truth of what he has been told, he may be held to have acted while suffering from grave and sudden provocation.
Provocation — Honest and Reasonable Belief
An accused person who acts under an honest and reasonable belief based on information received and circumstances observed may establish grave and sudden provocation, even if the provoking act was not witnessed directly, sufficient to reduce a charge of murder to manslaughter.

Legislation cited (1)

  • Uganda Penal Code s.199

Cases cited (2)

  • Rex v Musomi (2 E.A.C.A. 91)
  • passage at p. 902 of Archbold 28th Ed.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Ongiro (Cr. App. No. 116 of 1938.) [1938] EACA 111 (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.