Wakilii

Uganda v Monday (FPT-00-CR-SC 109 of 2019)

High Court · [2022] UGHC 146 · 2022 Conviction Entered AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance criminal trial on indictment for murder and two counts of attempted murder
Decision
Accused convicted of murder and one count of attempted murder; acquitted of second count of attempted murder; sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and 10 years 11 months 18 days for attempted murder, sentences to run concurrently

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 accused murdered Bwerindwa Bosco with malice aforethought by cutting him on the head with a panga, causing fatal injuries. The court found that the accused also attempted to murder Kakyo Dolika by cutting her fingers with a panga and chasing her with intent to kill. The prosecution failed to prove the attempted murder of Busobozi Julius due to insufficient evidence. The accused was convicted of murder and one count of attempted murder, acquitted on the second attempted murder count, and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and 10 years 11 months 18 days for attempted murder, to run concurrently.

Outcome

Accused convicted of murder and one count of attempted murder; acquitted of second count of attempted murder; sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and 10 years 11 months 18 days for attempted murder, sentences to run concurrently

Facts

On 3 February 2018 at approximately 8:00pm at Ihamba Trading Centre, Kyenjojo District, the accused Monday David, armed with a panga, chased Kakyo Dolika (his estranged lover) after cutting her fingers during a quarrel. Dolika fled into a bar owned by the deceased Bwerindwa Bosco and his wife PW1 Kajumba Edesi, seeking refuge. The accused followed her into the bar. When the deceased stood up and asked the accused to leave, the accused raised the panga and cut the deceased on the head, inflicting a deep wound that penetrated the skull and brain. The deceased died from these injuries on 4 February 2018. During the incident, Busobozi Julius responded to Dolika's alarm and was allegedly cut on the head by the accused. The accused fled the scene and was later arrested. In his defence, the accused denied the offences, claiming he was at home sleeping when police arrested him.

Issues

  1. Whether the death of Bwerindwa Bosco occurred.
  2. Whether the death of Bwerindwa Bosco was caused unlawfully.
  3. Whether the death of Bwerindwa Bosco was caused with malice aforethought.
  4. Whether the accused Monday David participated in the murder of Bwerindwa Bosco.
  5. Whether the accused Monday David attempted to murder Kakyo Dolika with malice aforethought and by overt acts.
  6. Whether the accused Monday David participated in the attempted murder of Kakyo Dolika.
  7. Whether the accused Monday David attempted to murder Busobozi Julius with malice aforethought and by overt acts.
  8. Whether the accused Monday David participated in the attempted murder of Busobozi Julius.

Orders

  • Accused found guilty of murder (Count 1) and convicted accordingly.
  • Accused found guilty of attempted murder (Count 3) and convicted accordingly.
  • Accused found not guilty of attempted murder (Count 2) and acquitted accordingly.
  • Accused sentenced to life imprisonment for murder (Count 1).
  • Accused sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for attempted murder (Count 3).
  • Period of 4 years and 12 days spent on remand deducted from sentence for attempted murder.
  • Effective sentence for attempted murder: 10 years, 11 months and 18 days.
  • Sentences to run concurrently.
  • Accused advised of right of appeal within 14 days.

Rules and key headnotes

Murder — Burden and Standard of Proof — Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
In a prosecution for murder, the burden of proof rests on the prosecution to prove each ingredient of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, and this burden does not shift to the accused except where a specific statutory provision provides otherwise. The standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond a shadow of doubt but requires that having considered all the evidence, there is no possibility that the accused is innocent.
Murder — Malice Aforethought — Inference from Weapon and Target
Malice aforethought may be inferred from the weapon used, the part of the body targeted, the degree of injury, and the conduct of the accused before and after the act. A panga is a deadly weapon, and the head is a vulnerable part of the body; injuries deliberately inflicted on the head with a panga are accompanied by the intention to cause death or knowledge that the acts would probably cause death.
Identification Evidence — Single Identifying Witness — Corroboration
Where the prosecution relies on the testimony of a single identifying witness, corroboration is required as a matter of practice and such identification evidence should be considered with caution. However, a court may proceed to convict on the evidence of a single identifying witness without corroboration if satisfied that the witness was truthful and there is no possibility of error in the identification of the perpetrator. Corroboration may be found in the conduct of the accused, such as fleeing the scene.
Attempted Murder — Elements of the Offence — Overt Act Manifesting Intention
The offence of attempted murder requires proof of malice aforethought (intention to cause death), manifestation of that intention by an overt act, and participation of the accused. An overt act is an act directed toward another person that indicates an intent to kill or harm. The act of chasing a victim with a deadly weapon after already inflicting injuries with that weapon constitutes an overt act manifesting the intention to kill.
Circumstantial Evidence — Standard for Conviction
Where a prosecution case is founded on purely circumstantial evidence, the court must find, before deciding upon conviction, that the inculpatory facts are incompatible with the innocence of the accused and incapable of explanation upon any other reasonable hypothesis than that of guilt. The circumstances must produce moral certainty to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.
Sentencing — Murder — Application of Sentencing Guidelines — Life Imprisonment
Under the Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013, a sentence of death may only be passed in exceptional circumstances in the rarest of rare cases where imprisonment for life or other custodial sentence is demonstrably inadequate. Where the circumstances do not justify a death sentence, the court shall consider imposing life imprisonment. In determining sentence, the court must consider aggravating and mitigating factors and ensure the total sentence is proportionate to the culpability of the offender.
Sentencing — Remand Period — Deduction from Sentence — Life Imprisonment
Article 23(8) of the Constitution requires that where a person is convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment, any period spent in lawful custody before completion of trial shall be taken into account in imposing the term of imprisonment. However, this provision applies only where the sentence is for a quantified term of imprisonment and does not apply to life imprisonment or death sentences, as these are not amenable to deduction of a specific period.

Legislation cited (16)

  • Penal Code Act s.188
  • Penal Code Act s.189
  • Penal Code Act s.191
  • Penal Code Act s.204
  • Penal Code Act s.386
  • Evidence Act s.133
  • Trial on Indictments Act s.66
  • Constitution of Uganda Article 23(8)
  • Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013 Paragraph 17
  • Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013 Paragraph 18
  • Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013 Paragraph 19
  • Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013 Paragraph 20
  • Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013 Paragraph 21
  • Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013 Paragraph 23
  • Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013 Paragraph 24
  • Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013 Regulation 15(2)

Cases cited (32)

  • Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462
  • Okethi Okale & Ors v Republic [1965] EA 555
  • Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372
  • Abdu Ngobi v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1991)
  • Gusambizi s/o Wesonge v Republic [1948] 15 EACA 65
  • R v Tubere s/o Ochieng [1945] EACA 63
  • Kwesimba v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1995)
  • Mwathi v Republic [2007] 2 EA 334
  • Jamada Nzabaikukize v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 01 of 2015)
  • Abdullah Bin Wendo and Another v R (1953) 20 EACA 583
  • Abdulla Nabulere v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1978)
  • Bogere Moses vs. Uganda
  • R v Baskerville [1916] 2 KB 658
  • R v Manilal Ishwerlal Purohit (1942) 9 EACA 58
  • Abdala bin Wendo & Anor v R (1953) 20 EACA 166
  • Bogere Charles v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1998)
  • Muhamed Mukasa & Anor v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 1995)
  • Telesfora Alex & Anor v Republic (1963) EA 140
  • Simon Musoke v R (1956) EA 715
  • Ninsiima v Uganda (Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 180 of 2010)
  • Kaddu Kavulu Lawrence v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 72 of 2018)
  • Ssekawoya Blasio v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 2014)
  • Rwalinda John v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 2015)
  • Mwesigye Richard & Another v Uganda (Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 246 of 2010)
  • Bukenya v Uganda (Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2007)
  • Aharikundira Yusitina v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 2015)
  • Ndyomugenyi Patrick v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 57 of 2016)
  • Syson Muganga v Uganda (Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2005)
  • Opolot Justine and Agamet Richard v Uganda (Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 155 of 2009)
  • Anthony Okwanga v Uganda (Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 45 of 1999)
  • Magezi Gad vs Uganda
  • Magala Ramathan v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 01 of 2014)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Monday (FPT-00-CR-SC 109 of 2019) [2022] UGHC 146 (17 February 2022)
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.