Wakilii

Uganda v Nyanda Zakary (Criminal Session 167 of 2024)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 147 · 2026 Conviction Entered AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance criminal trial for rape
Decision
Accused convicted of rape

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 convicted the accused of rape. The court held that where the first and third ingredients of rape (sexual intercourse and identity of the accused) were admitted through a memorandum of agreed facts and the accused's own testimony, they were deemed proved. On consent, the court rejected the accused's defence of a consensual secret relationship, holding that prior intimate encounters do not establish perpetual consent and that consent can be withdrawn at any time. The court found that the victim's testimony, corroborated by medical evidence showing human bites, manual strangulation marks, and injuries consistent with force, established lack of consent beyond reasonable doubt.

Outcome

Accused convicted of rape

Facts

On 30 April 2023 between 2-3am, the complainant Oloboo Esther was attending an introduction party in Masaloa East Village, Moyo district. She met the accused, Nyanda Zakary, who was her brother-in-law. The accused offered to escort her home to find her daughters. Along the way, the accused touched her breasts and waist. When she objected, he became violent, punched her on the head, threw her down, bit her lower lip, and strangled her. He then removed her clothes and forcefully had sexual intercourse with her. The complainant's daughter (PW2) received a call in the morning and found her mother lying unconscious under a tree with a swollen face and wound on her lips. Medical examination revealed human bites on the middle finger and lips, and signs of manual strangulation on the neck. The accused admitted sexual intercourse occurred but claimed it was consensual as they were in a secret relationship and had been intimate three times previously.

Issues

  1. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that sexual intercourse occurred between the accused and the complainant.
  2. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was the person who had sexual intercourse with the complainant.
  3. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the sexual intercourse occurred without the complainant's consent.

Orders

  • Accused found guilty of rape contrary to Sections 110 and 111 of the Penal Code Act, Cap.128.
  • Accused convicted of the offence of rape as charged.

Rules and key headnotes

Rape — Burden and Standard of Proof — Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
In all criminal trials, the burden of proof lies on the prosecution throughout the trial and does not shift to the accused except where there is a statutory provision to the contrary. The standard required to prove a criminal case is beyond reasonable doubt, which is that state of the case which, after entire comparison and consideration of all the evidence, leaves the court with an abiding conviction to a moral certainty of the truth of the charge.
Rape — Ingredients of the Offence — Elements to be Proved
The ingredients for the offence of rape under Section 110 of the Penal Code Act are: (a) that there was sexual intercourse with the complainant; (b) that there was no consent of the complainant to the sexual intercourse; and (c) that the accused is the person who committed the offence in question. All three ingredients must be proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt.
Agreed Facts — Effect of Memorandum of Agreed Facts
Facts agreed upon in a memorandum of agreed facts are presumed to have been proved. Under Section 67(3) of the Trial on Indictments Act, any fact or document admitted or agreed in a memorandum shall be deemed to have been duly proved. Similarly, under Section 57 of the Evidence Act, no fact need be proved in any proceeding which the parties agree to admit at the hearing or by writing under their hands.
Rape — Consent — Prior Intimate Relationship Does Not Establish Perpetual Consent
The existence of a previous intimate relationship between the accused and the complainant does not establish perpetual consent for sexual intercourse at any time the accused wishes. A woman's consent can be given and withdrawn at any time. When consent is withdrawn, any subsequent sexual act against her wish constitutes rape, even if intercourse was originally consensual.
Rape — Proof of Lack of Consent — Victim's Testimony and Corroborative Evidence
The issue of consent in the sexual offence of rape can be settled by the victim's oral testimony. Where the victim testifies that sexual intercourse was forced upon her without consent, and her testimony is corroborated by medical evidence showing injuries consistent with the use of force (such as human bites, manual strangulation marks, and facial bruises), the court may find lack of consent proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Rape — Consent — Definition and Assessment in Context
Consent in the context of rape means an individual's voluntary, genuine, and willing permission or agreement to participate in the sexual act. Consent must be assessed in the context of the surrounding circumstances, and exploitation of positions of vulnerability, trust, dependence or agency are relevant factors to prove lack of consent. Consent requires the exercise of intelligence based on knowledge of the act's significance and moral quality, and there must be a choice between resistance and assent.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (3)

  • Woolmington v DPP (1935) AC 462
  • Basita Hussein v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 1995)
  • Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Nyanda Zakary (Criminal Session 167 of 2024) [2026] UGHC 147 (24 February 2026)
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.