[2024] UGHCCRD 36
The applicant, charged with aggravated robbery, has been on remand for more than 180 days without committal for trial in the High Court. Rule 10(1) of the Bail Guidelines mandates release on bail under such circumstances, provided reasonable conditions are imposed. The prosecution failed to present evidence of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] UGHCCRD 36
- Parties
- Applicant: Kavuma Hassan; Respondent: Uganda
- Court
- HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 204 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Bail Application Ruling
- Outcome
- bail_granted
- Judges
- Muwata, J
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Mandatory Bail, Aggravated Robbery, Remand Periods
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kavuma Hassan
Applicant
Uganda
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Bail Application Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant qualifies for mandatory bail under Rule 10(1) of the Bail Guidelines after being on remand for more than 180 days without committal.
- 2 Whether the applicant has presented substantial sureties and satisfied other bail conditions.
- 3 Whether there are exceptional circumstances warranting release on bail for an offence punishable by death.
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant, charged with aggravated robbery, has been on remand for more than 180 days without committal for trial in the High Court. Rule 10(1) of the Bail Guidelines mandates release on bail under such circumstances, provided reasonable conditions are imposed. The prosecution failed to present evidence of committal or any exceptional circumstances justifying continued detention. The applicant satisfied the requirements for mandatory bail, including presenting substantial sureties and demonstrating a fixed place of abode. The court exercised its discretion in favor of the applicant, imposing appropriate terms to ensure his return for trial and compliance with reporting obligations.
Court Disposition
bail_granted
Orders
- The applicant shall deposit a cash bail of UGX 1,000,000.
- Each surety shall execute a non-cash bond of UGX 5,000,000.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
**THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA**
**CRIMINAL DIVISION**
**CRIMINAL MISC.204 OF 2023**
**KAVUMA HASSAN APPLICANT**
**VERSUS**
**UGANDA RESPONDENT**
**RULING**
**BEFORE HON: JUSTICE ISAAC MUWATA**
The applicant brought this application seeking to be released on bail pending the hearing of his case. The grounds of the application are contained in the affidavit of the applicant and are briefly that;
The applicant was charged with the offence of aggravated robbery and remanded to Luzira Prison. That since then the applicant has never been committed for trial in the High Court. The applicant further contends that he has a fixed place of abode, has substantial sureties and is the bread winner of a family of three. It is also contended by the applicant that he is innocent till proved guilty and that he has no capacity to interfere with any potential witnesses.
The respondent opposed the application on grounds that the applicant has not disclosed any exceptional circumstances to warrant his release on bail. It was also argued by the prosecution that the applicant is not law abiding and has been charged with a very serious offence that attracts a maximum sentence of death. They also contended that the sureties presented by the applicant are not substantial.
Counsel Elepu Joachim appeared for the applicant while SSA Amerit Timothy appeared for the respondent. Both parties filed their written submissions which l have considered.
The grant of bail is at the discretion of court. An accused person has the right to apply to be released on bail, and the court may grant such person bail on such terms it considers reasonable. This is in line with Article 23(6)(a) of the Constitution, the leading case of **Uganda V Rtd. Col. Kiiza Besigye Constitutional Reference No.20 of 2005**
The applicant in this case contends that he has been on remand for more than 180 days without being committed for trial in the High Court. It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that the accused person qualifies to be released on mandatory bail.
Mandatory bail is provided for in Rule 10(1) of the Bail Guideline. It provides;
**“Where an offence is triable only by the High Court, if that person has been remanded in custody for one hundred and eighty days before the case is committed to the High Court, that person shall be released on bail on such conditions as the court considers reasonable.”**
The applicant is charged with 8 counts of the offence of aggravated robbery, the remand form indicates that the applicant was first remanded on the 26th July 2023. From that day more than 180 days have passed without the applicant being committed. The prosecution has shown no evidence that the applicant has already been committed. In such circumstances the court should exercise its discretion in favor of the applicant and only impose appropriate terms to ensure that the applicant returns for his trial.
In the absence of any indication from the prosecution that the applicant has been committed for trial prior to clocking the 180 days on remand, I find that he qualifies to be released on mandatory bail. Accordingly, he shall be released on the following terms.
1. **He shall deposit a cash bail of shs. 1,000,000/=.** 2. **Each of the sureties presented in court shall execute a non-cash bond of shs. 5,000,000/=.** 3. **The applicant shall continue reporting to the Nakawa Chief Magistrates Court where the matter is still being mentioned.**
I so order
**JUDGE**
**29/04/2024**