[1995] UGHC 65
The court found that the sentence imposed by the magistrate—one year imprisonment or a fine of 75,000 shillings—did not comply with the section of the TRSA 1970 under which the accused was convicted. The section prescribes a different penalty, and the magistrate's sentence exceeded the lawful limits. The Resident...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1995] UGHC 65
- Parties
- Applicant: Uganda; Respondent: Loketa Justine
- Court
- High Court of Uganda
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 6 of 1995
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Order
- Outcome
- sentence set aside and substituted; excess fine ordered refunded
- Judges
- GM OKELLO, J
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Illegality, Revision of Sentence, Traffic Offences
- 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
Uganda
Applicant
Loketa Justine
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed by the magistrate complied with the section creating the offence.
- 2 Whether the sentence was legal and could stand.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the sentence imposed by the magistrate—one year imprisonment or a fine of 75,000 shillings—did not comply with the section of the TRSA 1970 under which the accused was convicted. The section prescribes a different penalty, and the magistrate's sentence exceeded the lawful limits. The Resident Senior State Attorney concurred that the sentence was illegal. The court, therefore, set aside the illegal sentence and substituted it with a lawful sentence of a fine of 5,000 shillings or, in default, one month imprisonment. The excess amount paid as a fine was ordered to be refunded to the accused.
Court Disposition
sentence set aside and substituted; excess fine ordered refunded
Orders
- The sentence of one year imprisonment or a fine of 75,000 shillings is set aside.
- A sentence of a fine of 5,000 shillings or, in default, one month imprisonment is substituted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
10 paragraphs
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA - AT GUIU CRIMINAL REVISION CRDER NO. NG 6/95 (Original Cr. Case No. TMG 296/95)
Uganda ........... versus .......... Loketa Justine. Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice G. M. Okello.
ORDER:-
The accused was charged and convicted on his own plea by a magistrate grade I Gulu of using a motor vehicle for carriage of Passengers or Goods for hire or reward without a licence c/s $(1)(a)$ of the TRSA '70. He was sentenced to 1 year imprisonment or to a fine of shs $75,000/$ = in lieu thereof. The fine was paid
The above order of sentence is illegal as it did not comply with the section which created the offence. The detailed reasons given in Revision Order No. 2/95 Uganda -vs- Obita aside Christopher for setting/a similar sentence imposed by the same magistrate applies to this case with equal force. The Resident Senior State Attorney in his letter ref RSA/N/GK/12/ 95/PAP dated 15/12/95 agreed that the sentence was illegal for non compliance with the section which created the offence. He did not wish to be heard in the event of a Revision Order being made.
As stated here earlier, the order of sentence is illegal. It can not be allowed to stand. It is thus set aside and in its place substituted the following orders:-
Sentence:- Fine of shs $5,000/$ = or in default 1 month imprisonment.
$Order: -$
The balance of $70,000/=$ be refunded to the accused.
Carolin. G. M. Okello Resident Judge Gulu. $18/12/95$ .