Wakilii

Uganda v Biryomumisho Wyclif and Another (Criminal Case 247 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 1567 · 2025 Acquittal Entered AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Ruling on prima facie case at close of prosecution case in first instance criminal trial
Decision
Both accused acquitted and released from proceedings at close of prosecution 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

At the close of the prosecution case, the court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case on all three counts. The sole prosecution witness merely recorded statements in which the accused denied involvement and provided no direct or circumstantial evidence of sexual intercourse, lack of consent, conspiracy, or trafficking. Both accused were acquitted under section 74 of the Trial on Indictments Act.

Outcome

Both accused acquitted and released from proceedings at close of prosecution case

Facts

On 22 February 2024 at Omukatooma village in Rukungiri District, the complainant Kyampeire Susan alleged that Biryomumisho Wyclif (A1) raped her and that Twinomujini Doreen (A2) conspired with him and harboured or confined her to facilitate the rape. A1 was charged with rape, both accused were charged with conspiracy to commit rape, and A2 was charged with trafficking in persons. Medical examination on 24 February 2024 found the complainant to be a young adult with a positive HCG test but an otherwise normal examination. The investigating officer PW1 testified that he interviewed both accused persons in March 2024; A1 denied the rape allegation and A2 stated she had left the complainant in her house taking soda and did not lock the house. PW1 found no witnesses when he went to collect statements.

Issues

  1. Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case of rape against the first accused.
  2. Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case of conspiracy to commit rape against both accused persons.
  3. Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case of trafficking in persons against the second accused.

Orders

  • Biryomumisho Wyclif and Twinomujini Doreen are acquitted of the charges of rape, conspiracy to commit rape and trafficking in persons.
  • The accused are released from the proceedings unless held on other lawful charges.

Rules and key headnotes

Prima Facie Case — Standard at Close of Prosecution Case
At the close of the prosecution case under section 74 of the Trial on Indictments Act, a prima facie case exists if on the evidence adduced a reasonable tribunal could convict the accused if they chose to remain silent; if no such case is disclosed, the accused is entitled to acquittal at that stage.
Burden of Proof — Presumption of Innocence
The constitutional presumption of innocence under Article 28(3)(a) places the burden of proof on the prosecution throughout the trial and does not shift to the accused; the prosecution must prove every element of the offence beyond reasonable doubt with cogent, consistent and sufficient evidence that excludes any reasonable alternative hypothesis consistent with innocence.
Rape — Elements of Prima Facie Case
To establish a prima facie case of rape, the prosecution must prove sexual intercourse, lack of consent, and participation of the accused; a medical report showing a positive pregnancy test without evidence of recent sexual intercourse or identification of the perpetrator, coupled with the accused's denial and no direct or circumstantial evidence linking the accused to the complainant, is insufficient to establish a prima facie case.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (1)

  • Wabiro alias Musa v R (1960) EA 184

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Biryomumisho Wyclif and Another (Criminal Case 247 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 1567 (22 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.