Wakilii

Uganda v Byaruhanga Augustine and Magezi Alex (Criminal Sessions Case 234 of 2015)

High Court · [2018] UGHC 111 · 2018 Conviction Entered AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance criminal trial for murder before the High Court
Decision
Two accused persons convicted of murder and sentenced to 32 years and 5 months' imprisonment each after deducting remand time; third accused acquitted and discharged

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

Held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the two accused persons, Byaruhanga Augustine and Magezi Alex, murdered Nyamagambo Jane on 17 August 2015. The deceased was raped, strangled, and dumped in a lake. Circumstantial evidence established that both accused participated in the murder with malice aforethought. The third accused, Kabwana Red, was acquitted for lack of evidence linking him to the crime. Each convicted accused was sentenced to 35 years' imprisonment less the 2 years and 7 months spent on remand.

Outcome

Two accused persons convicted of murder and sentenced to 32 years and 5 months' imprisonment each after deducting remand time; third accused acquitted and discharged

Facts

On the night of 17 August 2015 at Rwenjubu Village, Kasese District, Nyamagambo Jane was found dead in a lake. The deceased had been drinking alcohol with Byaruhanga Augustine (A1) and Magezi Alex (A2) at their landlady's bar until 9pm. After the bar closed, A1 was heard calling the deceased to come to his house for sexual intercourse. A neighbour advised the deceased against going, but the deceased insisted she would go because she ate A1's fish. At 2am, A1 informed the landlady that the deceased was missing, her light was on, food was on the table, and her door was open. A1 stated that he should not be blamed if anything happened to the deceased. The body of the deceased was later found in the lake. Post-mortem examination revealed scratch marks on her right thigh, a squeezed Adam's apple, and respiratory failure due to strangulation. Her underwear was torn and to one side, confirming she had been raped. She had been strangled before being dumped in the lake. A1 and A2 were present at the fishing site when the body was discovered and reported it to the Marine Police. The third accused, Kabwana Red (A3), was alleged only to have woken A1 and A2 to go fishing that morning.

Issues

  1. Whether the prosecution proved the death of Nyamagambo Jane beyond reasonable doubt.
  2. Whether the death of the deceased was caused unlawfully.
  3. Whether the killing was done with malice aforethought.
  4. Whether Byaruhanga Augustine and Magezi Alex participated in the commission of the murder.

Orders

  • Kabwana Red (A3) found not guilty of murder and acquitted.
  • Kabwana Red discharged.
  • Byaruhanga Augustine (A1) convicted of murder contrary to sections 188 and 189 of the Penal Code Act.
  • Magezi Alex (A2) convicted of murder contrary to sections 188 and 189 of the Penal Code Act.
  • Byaruhanga Augustine sentenced to 35 years' imprisonment less 2 years and 7 months spent on remand, leaving 32 years and 5 months.
  • Magezi Alex sentenced to 35 years' imprisonment less 2 years and 7 months spent on remand, leaving 32 years and 5 months.
  • Right of appeal explained.

Rules and key headnotes

Murder — Ingredients — Burden and Standard of Proof
In a murder trial, the prosecution bears the burden of proving all ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, namely: that the deceased is dead; that the death was caused unlawfully; that there was malice aforethought; and that the accused directly or indirectly participated in the commission of the offence.
Murder — Malice Aforethought — Inference from Circumstances
Malice aforethought is a mental element difficult to prove by direct evidence but may be inferred from surrounding circumstances including the weapon used, the part of the body targeted, the manner in which the weapon was used, and the conduct of the assailant before, during and after the attack.
Circumstantial Evidence — Probative Value — Conviction Without Corroboration
There is no invariable principle that before basing a conviction on circumstantial evidence there must be corroboration. Circumstantial evidence, when properly handled, may be of higher probative value than direct evidence which may be perjured or mistaken.
Murder — Participation — Joint Enterprise
Where two accused persons are together at the time the deceased goes to their location and circumstantial evidence establishes that the deceased was raped, strangled, and dumped in a lake, both may be found to have participated in the murder even in the absence of direct evidence identifying which accused performed each act.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (12)

  • Article 28 (3) (a) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 as amended
  • Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462
  • Miller v Minister of Pensions (1947) 2 All ER 372
  • Uganda v Dick Ojok (1992/93) HCB 54
  • Uganda v Bosco Okello [1992/93] HCB 68
  • Uganda v Muzamiru Bakubye & Anor (High Court Criminal Session No. 399 of 2010)
  • R v Tubere (1945) 12 EACA 63
  • Akol Patrick & Others v Uganda (2006) HCB Vol I
  • Uganda v Aggrey Kiyinji & Others (High Court Criminal Session Case No. 30 of 2006)
  • Kitosi Abla & Anor v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 154 of 2010)
  • Akbar Hussein Godi v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 62 of 2011)
  • Republic v Thomas Gilbert Chocmo Ndeley (Kenya High Court Criminal Case No. 55 of 2006)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Byaruhanga Augustine and Magezi Alex (Criminal Sessions Case 234 of 2015) [2018] UGHC 111 (20 March 2018)
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.