THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT MPIGI
CRIMINAL SESSION NO.18 OF 2018
UGANDA:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
1. MISAVU PAUL
2. MUKASA ARAMANZAN::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;; ACCUSED
BEFORE: HON. JUSTICE EMMANUEL BAGUMA
JUDGMENT
Misavu Paul and Mukasa Aramanzan were indicted with one count of aggravated robbery contrary to sections 285 and 286 (2)and (3) (a) of the Penal Code Act and one count of Rape contrary to sections 123 and 124 of the Penal Code Act.
It was alleged that
For the offence of aggravated robbery to be proved, there are four ingredients that have to be established which include;
- That there was theft of property.
- That there was violence.
- That a deadly weapon was used or threatened to be used.
- That the accused participated in committing the crime
The state called three witnesses while the accused persons gave sworn testimonies and called no witnesses.
Whether there was theft of property?
PW2 the complainant testified that on 25/9/2014 at around 4:00 am, he was on his motorcycle going to Nabisukiro when he noticed a motor vehicle behind him and it almost knocked him down.. He also stated that A1 fell on him and tried to hit him with an iron bar but he dodged. He added that he noticed another person with a gun and he tried to run away but they chased him to the bush. He stated that A1 held the motorcycle and that he has never recovered it.
From the evidence above, I find that prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was theft of property.
Whether there was violence?
PW2 stated that A1 fell on him and tried to hit him with an iron bar but he dodged.
PW3 also testified that the suspects knocked him down with a car.
From this evidence above, I find that prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was violence.
Whether a deadly weapon was used or threatened to be used?
Under Section 286 (3) (a) (I) of the Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2007, a deadly weapon includes “any instrument made or adopted for shooting, stabbing or cutting or any imitation of such instrument.”
PW2 testified that A1 tried to hit him with an iron abr. He also stated that he saw another man with a gun.
PW3 also testified that he saw a man holding a big stick then another holding a gun who robbed him of his money.
It has therefore been proved by prosecution beyond reasonable that a deadly weapon was used.
Whether the accused persons participated in the robbery?
PW2 stated that he identified A1 He stated that he recognized A1 using the lights of his motorcycle and he knew him before the incident. He added that he saw A1 very well when he fell on him trying to hit him.
PW3 testified that he recognized A1 using the lights of his motorcycle.
On the other hand the accused persons denied committing the offence. DW1 Misavu Paul stated that on that fateful day he was at his workplace fishing from 5:00pm to 9:00 am.
DW2 Mukasa Aramanzan stated that on that fateful night, he was at his work place then he went back home at night.
.
Much as the accused persons bear no burden to prove their innocence, I find that the prosecution witnesses were so consistent and properly identified the accused persons at the scene of crime.
I therefore find that prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused persons participated in the robbery in count one and count two.
acquitted of attempted rape in count IV.
In conclusion therefore, I find that prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused persons, A1 and A2 committed aggravated robbery and in agreement with the assessors, I convict them accordingly.
……………………………………..
Emmanuel Baguma
Judge.
01/04/19
Prosecutor –Aggravating factors
A1 has no previous criminal record. However, I pray for a stiff sentence. The accused was 21 years old by then who should have used his energy to work for his survival other than stealing people’s property. I pray for 20 (twenty years imprisonment).
Defence: Mitigating factors
The accused is a first offender; the accused is capable of reforming. The accused has been on remand since 29/10/2014 making it 4 years and 7 months and 9 days. I pray that the period spent on remand be considered. The accused has a family with five children. I pray for lenience on the sentence. I so pray
Reasons for sentence.
I have considered both aggravating and mitigating factors. I have also considered the nature of the offence and circumstances under which the offence was committed.
I have considered the above and the accused is sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. However, since he has been on remand for four years , 7 months and 9 days, I will subtract the period spent on remand and sentence the accused person to serve a period of 15 years , four months and 21 days.
Emmanuel Baguma
Judge
7/6/2019
Right of appeal within 14 days explained.
Emmanuel Baguma
Judge
7/6/2019
