Wakilii

Uganda v Andabati & Ors (Criminal Case No. 0173 of 2015)

High Court · [2016] UGHCCRD 49 · 2016 Partial Acquittal AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ruling on no case to answer submission at close of prosecution case in a murder trial
Decision
Seven accused acquitted and discharged; one accused put to defence on prima facie case

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

Court held that the prosecution established a prima facie case of murder only against accused A1 Andabati Kasto Samuel, who was placed at the scene as the school night watchman who directed the mob to the deceased. Seven other accused were acquitted for failure of the prosecution to adduce evidence placing them at the scene of crime or showing their participation in the unlawful killing.

Outcome

Seven accused acquitted and discharged; one accused put to defence on prima facie case

Facts

On 12 September 2012 at Yivu-Pio village, Maracha District, Special Police Constable Asitia Milsome Stephen was killed. He and crime preventer Asibazio Juliet were guarding a police vehicle at Yivu Primary School when a mob attacked. They attempted to escape but the deceased was caught and assaulted by the mob. His body was found the following morning with multiple cut wounds to the head, fractured skull with brain matter exuding, fractured cervical vertebrae, and other injuries. Post-mortem examination established the cause of death as cut wounds with fracture of skull and cervical vertebrae with hemorrhagic shock. Eight accused persons were jointly charged with murder. The prosecution called six witnesses. At close of prosecution case, defence submitted no prima facie case had been established.

Issues

  1. Whether the prosecution adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of murder against each of the eight accused persons.
  2. Whether the evidence established that each accused was at the scene of crime and participated in the unlawful killing of Special Police Constable Asitia Milsome Stephen.

Orders

  • A prima facie case established against A1 Andabati Kasto Samuel.
  • A1 Andabati Kasto Samuel put to his defence.
  • A2 Drabe Milton found not guilty and acquitted.
  • A3 Drapari Kennedy found not guilty and acquitted.
  • A4 Dralema Joel found not guilty and acquitted.
  • A5 Andruga Sereph found not guilty and acquitted.
  • A6 Ongua Richard Dratia found not guilty and acquitted.
  • A7 Yiacia Lawrence found not guilty and acquitted.
  • A8 Adiru Agnes found not guilty and acquitted.
  • Seven acquitted accused to be released forthwith unless lawfully held on other charges.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Law & Procedure — No Case to Answer — Test for Prima Facie Case
A prima facie case is established when the evidence adduced is such that a reasonable tribunal, properly directing its mind on the law and evidence, would convict the accused if no evidence or explanation was set up by the defence. A prima facie case cannot be established by a mere scintilla of evidence or by worthless, discredited prosecution evidence.
Criminal Law & Procedure — No Case to Answer — Grounds for Finding No Prima Facie Case
There is no prima facie case made out when there has been no evidence to prove an essential ingredient in the alleged offence, or when the evidence adduced by prosecution has been so discredited as a result of cross-examination or is manifestly unreliable that no reasonable court could safely convict on it.
Evidence — Proof of Death — Methods of Proving Death of Human Being
Death of a human being may be proved by production of a post-mortem report or evidence of witnesses who state they knew the deceased and attended the burial or saw the dead body of the deceased.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Murder — Presumption of Unlawful Homicide
Any homicide is presumed to have been caused unlawfully unless it was accidental or otherwise legally justified.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Malice Aforethought — Inference from Weapon and Target
If the weapon used to inflict injuries from which the deceased died is a lethal or deadly weapon, or if the injuries are fatal or life-threatening and inflicted on vital or vulnerable parts of the body, malice aforethought will readily be inferred. Courts consider the weapon used, the manner in which it was used, and the part of the body targeted.
Evidence — Participation in Crime — Mere Presence at Scene Insufficient
Mere presence at the scene when an attack was perpetrated is not by itself indicative of the existence of conspiracy or participation. There must be evidence showing guilty participation in the criminal design or placing the accused at the actual scene of the crime with evidence of a common design.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (8)

  • Wabiro alias Musa v R [1960] EA 184
  • Kadiri Kyanju and Others v Uganda [1974] HCB 215
  • Rananlal T. Bhatt v R [1957] EA 332
  • Practice Note of Lord Parker [1962] ALL E.R 448
  • Uganda v Alfred Ateu [1974] HCB 179
  • Gusambizi s/o Wesonga v R (1948) 15 EACA 63
  • R v Tubere s/o Ochen (1945) 12 EACA 63
  • Uganda v Manuela Awacango and Another (Criminal Session Case No. 16 of 2006)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Andabati & Ors (Criminal Case No. 0173 of 2015) [2016] UGHCCRD 49 (19 August 2016)
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.