Uganda v. Odoi Girifasio (Crim. Case No.46 Of 2000 ) (Crim. Case No.46 of 2000)
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 failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that sexual intercourse occurred on the date alleged. Medical evidence showed no signs of recent sexual intercourse and indicated the hymen had ruptured at least seven days before the examination. The testimony of the complainant and eyewitness, though requiring corroboration, was contradicted by the medical findings. The accused was acquitted.
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged
Facts
On 16 May 1999 at about 11:00 am at Apokor village, Tororo District, the complainant Kevina Isilo, aged 10, alleged that the accused Odoi Girifasio called her to come for cassava while she was returning from church. She went to him in a millet garden, and he grabbed her neck, tore her pants, and had sexual intercourse with her. She raised an alarm and the accused's sister-in-law Mary Athieno came. The accused ran away. An eyewitness Mary Athieno testified that she was called by one Peace to witness what the accused was doing, and she found the accused having removed his trousers and on top of Kevina. Both the accused and Kevina ran away after Mary Athieno raised an alarm. Kevina's mother Federika Amusugutu found her daughter lying on the ground full of sand with torn pants. A medical examination conducted at 3:00 pm on the same day found that Kevina's hymen was ruptured but at least seven days prior to examination, with no signs of recent sexual intercourse. The accused, a 63-year-old lame man who walked with a crutch, denied the offence and claimed he was framed due to a land dispute with the Komolo clan.
Issues
- Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the victim Kevina Isilo was involved in an act of sexual intercourse on 16 May 1999.
- Whether the prosecution adduced sufficient corroboration evidence to support the testimony of the child complainant who testified not on oath.
- Whether the medical evidence was consistent with sexual intercourse having taken place on the date alleged.
Orders
- Accused acquitted of the charge of defilement contrary to section 123(1) of the Penal Code Act.
- Accused to be set free and at liberty forthwith unless held on other lawful charges.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
- Penal Code Act s.123(1)
- Trial on Indictments Decree s.38(3)
Cases cited (11)
- Sulaiman Katusabe v Uganda (S.C. Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1991)
- Bogere Moses and Another v Uganda (S.C. Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 1997)
- Sekitoleko v Uganda [1967] EA 531
- Patrick Akol v Uganda (S.C. Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 1992)
- Remegious Kiwanuka v Uganda (supra)
- Chila and Another v Republic [1967] EA 722
- Sam Buteera v Uganda (S.C. Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 1994)
- Safari Innocent v Uganda (S.C. Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 1995)
- Albino Ojok v Uganda (Supra)
- Woolmington v DPP [1953] AC 462
- Israel Epuku v R (1934) EACA 166
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.