Uganda v Kakayo (Criminal Revision 22 of 1993) [1996] UGHC 35 (2 January 1996)

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA - HOLDEN AT GUIU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO. 22/93 (Original Criminal Case No. MM 244/91)

Uganda ............ versus ......., Rose Kakeyo. Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice G. M. Okello.

## $ORDER: -$

The accused in the above case was convicted of Giving False Information to A person Employed in the Public Service contrary to section 109 (a) of the Penal Code Act and was sentenced to a fine of shs. 45,000/= or in default to 3 months imprisonment. She was committed to prison in default of paying the fine.

The file was called for inspection. It was pubsequently placed before me. On perusal, I had no quarrel with the conviction and sentence. My concern however was aroused by the Commitment Warrant dated 21/2/92 by which the accused was committed to prison in default of paying the fine.

The Commitment Warrant indicated that the a cused was committed to 3 months imprisonment in default of paying the fine of $5,000/=$ . Yet the court order showed that the accused was, fined shs 45,000/=. This disparity had also aroused the concern of the State Attorney who wrote opinion for the DPP when opinion of the latter was sought. In her letter ref DPP/04/9 of 11th July 1995 the learned State Attorney said

> "After perusal of the court record, I find that firstly, the warrant of commitment.

on a sentence of Imprisonment does not tally with the sentence imposed by the magistrate. Whereas the magistrate sentenced the offender to a fine of $45,000/$ = or 3 months imprisonment under S. $192(d)$ of the MCA. the warrant of commitment on a sentence of imprisonment provides for a fine of only $5,000/=$ or 3 months imprisonment in default".

A Commitment Warrant must reflect the sentence actually imposed by the trial magistrate. In this case as the fine imposed was $45,000/$ , the maximum default sentence provided under section

$.../2...$

192 (d) of the M. C. A as amended by Act 4 of 1985 is rightly 3 months. That should have been reflected in the Commitment Warrant.

$-2-$

In the whole, no miscarriage of justice was caused by that slip of the pen. No further action is therefore deemed necessary in the matter. No revision order will thus be made.

> Butuno G. M. Okollo Resident Judge Gulu. $2/1/96$ .

◢

$\mathbf{1}$ $\boldsymbol{\Upsilon}$ $\mathcal{T}\mathrm{i}$ $W\mathring{I}.$ $W\mathcal{T}$ $\mathbf{S}\mathbf{O}$ $\texttt{St}_\mathfrak{l}$

$\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$

$\overline{\text{om}}$ $t h \varepsilon$ $10C$