Wakilii

Uganda v Karungi and Another (HCT-00-CR-SC 171 of 2019)

High Court · [2023] UGHCCRD 22 · 2023 Acquittal Entered AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance criminal trial for murder
Decision
Accused acquitted and ordered released unless lawfully 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 High Court acquitted the accused of two counts of murder. The prosecution proved death, unlawful killing, and malice aforethought beyond reasonable doubt. However, the prosecution failed to prove participation. The charge and caution statement was recorded in English rather than Luganda, the accused's language, and the accused bore healing torture marks at the time of recording. The call detail records did not establish the identity of the subscribers or place the accused at the scene. The court found the investigations flawed, narrow, and reliant on speculation about ADF involvement without corroborating evidence.

Outcome

Accused acquitted and ordered released unless lawfully held on other charges

Facts

On 8 September 2018 at approximately 8:00 pm at Bulenga trading centre in Wakiso District, ASP Kirumira Muhammad and Mbabazi Resty Nalinya were shot and killed. An eyewitness saw two motorcycles, each carrying two persons in black jackets, approach the deceased's parked vehicle. The assailants shot the rear tyre, then fired multiple bullets at both occupants from close range. Both victims died from hemorrhagic shock caused by multiple gunshot wounds. Karungi Abubakar (A1) was arrested in Bulisa and charged with murder. The prosecution alleged he conducted surveillance on Kirumira at the instruction of one Kateregga Abdu, an alleged ADF operative. A2 Mwebe Hamza was acquitted on no case to answer. The prosecution relied on a charge and caution statement and call detail records linking A1's phone number to Kateregga's number. A1 denied the charges, claimed he was tortured into signing documents, and stated he was working as a carpenter in Bulisa at the time of arrest.

Issues

  1. Whether there was death of two human beings.
  2. Whether the cause of death was unlawful.
  3. Whether the unlawful death was caused with malice aforethought.
  4. Whether the accused Kalungi Abubakar caused or participated in causing the death.

Orders

  • Accused Kalungi Abubakar acquitted of two counts of murder.
  • Accused to be released unless lawfully held over some other lawful charges.

Rules and key headnotes

Burden of Proof — Standard of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
In a criminal trial, the prosecution bears the burden of proving all essential ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, meaning the evidence must establish the defendant's guilt so clearly that it must be accepted as fact by any rational person, leaving no other reasonable explanation derivable from the evidence apart from the guilt of the accused.
Murder — Essential Ingredients
To prove murder, the prosecution must establish: (1) death of a person; (2) that the cause of death was unlawful; (3) that death was caused with malice aforethought; and (4) that the accused participated in the murder.
Malice Aforethought — Proof by Circumstantial Evidence
Malice aforethought is a mental element which may be difficult to prove by direct evidence but can be deduced from circumstantial evidence, including the weapon used, the manner in which it was used, and the part of the body targeted.
Confessions — Charge and Caution Statements — Language Requirements
A charge and caution statement must be recorded in the language the suspect understands, or if recorded in another language, must be read back to the suspect in the language he understands with the suspect signing to confirm he understood the contents. Failure to comply with this constitutional right under Article 23(3) renders the statement unsafe to rely upon.
Confessions — Retracted Confessions — Torture
A confession obtained through torture has no evidential value and is irrelevant under section 24 of the Evidence Act. Where an accused bears healing torture marks at the time of recording a statement and alleges coercion, the court must scrutinise the circumstances and may decline to rely on the confession if the process of obtaining it was flawed.
Call Detail Records — Identity of Subscriber — Corroboration Required
Call detail records are useful investigative tools but must be corroborated by independent evidence establishing the identity of the subscriber or user of the mobile phone number. Without evidence of subscription or testimony from persons who communicated with the number, call data alone cannot prove participation in a crime.
Participation — Proof Required
To prove participation in a crime, the prosecution must adduce credible direct or circumstantial evidence placing the accused at the scene of the crime as an active participant. Even where participation is alleged by remote control, the accused's mens rea and actus reus must be proved to show the extent of participation. Suspicion, however strong, can never be a basis for conviction.

Legislation cited (13)

Cases cited (9)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Karungi and Another (HCT-00-CR-SC 171 of 2019) [2023] UGHCCRD 22 (24 April 2023)
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.