Wakilii

Uganda v Bawutu Saleh Yazid (Criminal Session Case 123 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 1073 · 2025 Acquittal Entered AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance criminal trial for aggravated defilement
Decision
Accused acquitted and set free unless held on other charges

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 accused was charged with aggravated defilement of a four-year-old girl. The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a sexual act occurred. Medical evidence of a ruptured hymen contradicted eyewitness testimony from two women who examined the victim immediately after the incident and found no visible injuries. The court acquitted the accused due to irreconcilable contradictions in the prosecution's evidence.

Outcome

Accused acquitted and set free unless held on other charges

Facts

On 13 December 2023 at about 12pm in Mafubira, Jinja District, PW2 encountered a man seated with a four-year-old girl behind Busede Secondary School. The man had lifted the girl's skirt and was watching her private parts. When PW2 approached, the man stood and walked away. PW2 took the girl to her mother, PW1, who examined her daughter and found nothing unusual in her private parts. The girl stated the man told her to sit, lift her skirt, and promised her 100 shillings. Residents identified the accused as a watchman at Busede Secondary School based on the description. He was arrested within 30 minutes. Medical examination on 14 December 2023 found the girl had a ruptured hymen with visible injuries consistent with forcible sexual penetration. The accused denied the charges, claiming he was at Majid's home building at the material time.

Issues

  1. Whether the victim was under 14 years of age.
  2. Whether a sexual act was performed on the victim.
  3. Whether the accused was the person who performed the sexual act.

Orders

  • Accused found not guilty of aggravated defilement contrary to section 116(3)(4)(a) of the Penal Code Act Cap 128.
  • Accused acquitted and set free unless held on other charges.

Rules and key headnotes

Aggravated Defilement — Proof of Sexual Act — Burden of Proof
In a prosecution for aggravated defilement, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that a sexual act was performed on the victim; where medical evidence contradicts eyewitness testimony regarding the occurrence of a sexual act, and no effort is made to reconcile the contradiction, the prosecution fails to discharge its burden.
Medical Evidence — Contradictory Testimony — Duty to Reconcile
Where medical evidence contradicts the testimony of eyewitnesses who examined the victim immediately after the alleged offence, the prosecution should call the examining doctor to explain clinical findings that were not apparent to lay witnesses; failure to reconcile such contradictions undermines the prosecution's case.
Standard of Proof — Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond the shadow of doubt; if evidence is so strong against an accused as to leave only a remote possibility in his favour which can be dismissed as not in the least probable, the case is proved beyond reasonable doubt, but nothing short of that will suffice.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (1)

  • Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Bawutu Saleh Yazid (Criminal Session Case 123 of 2025) [2025] UGHC 1073 (7 October 2025)
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.