Wakilii

Uganda v Good Portinanto (Criminal Session Case 45 of 1989)

High Court · [1990] UGHC 26 · 1990 Accused Acquitted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance criminal trial following reduction of charge from murder to manslaughter
Decision
Accused acquitted and ordered released forthwith

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 High Court acquitted the accused of manslaughter. Two prosecution witnesses gave contradictory dying declarations: one stated the accused speared the deceased accidentally, the other stated he speared her. These material contradictions went to the root of the case and made it impossible to accept the prosecution's evidence as truthful. Under section 9 of the Penal Code, an act occurring by accident does not attract criminal responsibility where intent is not an element of the offence. The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused unlawfully caused the deceased's death.

Outcome

Accused acquitted and ordered released forthwith

Facts

In March 1982, UNLA soldiers from Kabamba barracks terrorised villages in Kabarole District, causing residents to flee into the bush and establish temporary shelters. The deceased Balyesiima, her husband Byaruhanga, and the accused Good Portinanto (Byaruhanga's brother) lived together in the bush with their families. One night around 10 p.m., gunshots were heard followed by an alarm from the deceased's camp. PW3 found the deceased with a spear wound near her breast, her lungs visible as she breathed. The deceased made statements to both PW2 and PW3 before dying the following morning at 10 a.m. She was eight months pregnant. The accused disappeared after the incident. He was arrested in 1986 and handed over to police with the spear. The accused explained that in confusion following gunshots, his dogs pulled him, stumbling over a spear he had stuck in the ground, causing it to fall, and the deceased running out bagged herself on it.

Issues

  1. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused unlawfully caused the death of the deceased.
  2. Whether the dying declarations made by the deceased were admissible and sufficient to establish guilt.
  3. Whether the prosecution's evidence contained material contradictions that went to the root of the case.
  4. Whether the accused's conduct of disappearing after the incident supported an inference of guilt.

Orders

  • Accused acquitted of the charge of manslaughter contrary to section 182 of the Penal Code Act.
  • Immediate release of the accused ordered unless held on another charge.

Rules and key headnotes

Evidence — Dying Declarations — Contradictory Statements — Weight
Where two prosecution witnesses give contradictory dying declarations from the same deceased person, and these contradictions are of a serious nature going to the root of the case, the court cannot decide whether the prosecution's evidence is capable of being believed.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Burden of Proof — Standard of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
In criminal cases, the burden of proof lies on the prosecution throughout to prove the guilt of the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. That burden does not shift, and the accused has no burden to prove his innocence.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Manslaughter — Accidental Causation — Section 9 Penal Code
Under section 9 of the Penal Code, a person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission which occurs independently of the exercise of his will or for an event which occurs by accident, unless the intent to cause a particular result is expressly declared to be an element of the offence. Where intent is not an element of the offence of manslaughter and the evidence establishes the death was caused accidentally, the accused is exonerated.
Evidence — Dying Declarations — Admissibility — Hopeless Expectation of Death
A dying declaration, though not made on oath and not made in the presence of the accused, is admissible in evidence either against or for the accused provided that at the time the statement was made, the person making it had an unqualified belief without hope that he was about to die almost immediately.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Proof of Guilt — Flight After Incident — Evidentiary Value
Where the prosecution relies on the accused's disappearance after an incident as evidence of guilt, but adduces no evidence that the accused was looked for and could not be found, and the accused provides an explanation for his absence, the prosecution's case is incomplete and the accused's explanation must be accepted in the absence of contradictory evidence.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (7)

  • Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462
  • R v Jenkins (1869) LR 1 CCR 187
  • RVs Staiffe 18361 Mood & 551 Rev Coleridge J.
  • Ralsbury Laws of England 10th Ed. P. 723 Page 725 Para 1589
  • Uganda v Bikamikire (Criminal Case No. 63 of 1972)
  • Uganda vs Dusmani Ndyaka Sabuni HMB Vol. 13 1981 P1
  • other vs Uganda 1978 HCB 181

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Good Portinanto (Criminal Session Case 45 of 1989) [1990] UGHC 26 (7 August 1990)
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.