Uganda v Lakot Levecy (Criminal Session Case No. 370 of 1995) [1996] UGHC 77 (4 November 1996)

## THE REPUBLIC OF UGAND.

## IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT SESSION

## HCLDEN AT GULP

CRIMINAL SESSION CASE NO. 370 OF 1995

UGANDA . . *............. PROSECUTION* VERSUS

LAKOT LEVECY ACCUSED

BEFORE; HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. M. OKELLO

## SENTENCE

The accused, Lakot Levecy, was originally indicted on a charge of murder contrary to section <sup>183</sup> of the Penal Code Act. The particulars of the offence alleged that on or about the 20th day of December <sup>1994</sup> at Laco-anga village, Lukome, Bungatira Division Aswa County in Gulu District the accused murdered one Lakot Christine.

When the charge was put to her, the accused offered a plea of guilty to manslaughter a minor and cognate offence to murder. The Resident Senior State Attorney accepted that offer of plea. According to the facts narrated by the Prosecuting Counsel, the accused and the deceased were co-wives. They shared a husband.

0n the fateful night, the accused, the deceased and their husband had returned from a Christmas Party at the hone of a neighbour. On arrival at their home, their husband decided to have his supper at the accused's house. This a.ct appeared to have annoyed the deceased who came by the accused's house and started to quarrel with the accused over that act of their husband\* This appeared to have provoked the accused vzho came out with a knife and stabbed the deceased six times all over her body. The deceased died later that night from the injuries inflicted. Post mortem examination report indicated that the cause of death of the deceased was Lung Damage —

Haemo thorax.

The accused was then arrested and eventually indicted for the murder of her co-wife. She was later taken before a Magistrate at the Chief Magistrate's Court Gulu where she made an extra judicial statement. In the statement she admitted to have caused the death of the deceased.

Manslaughter of which the accused was convicted carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment under section 182 of the Penal Code Act. Court however, has power to impose a lesser sentence if the circumstances of the case warranted.

In the instant case, the accused was stated to be a first offender. An established practice of this court is not to impose the maximum sentence on a first offender unless that is a mandatory sentence. It is also a requirement of the law that the period apent by an accused in custody prior to his trial must be taken into account when considering sentence. The accused was stated to have spent 1 year and 9 months in custody prior to her trial as from 5th January 1995.

The circumstances in which the offence was committed revealed some form of provocation by the deceased to the accused. She went to accusals house to quarrel with her there. That was provocation. Then the accused responded by stabbing the deceased six times. That response was no doubt excessive. In those circumstances, reasonable punishable is necessary to express disproval of the excess of the accused.

Taking into consideration the fact the accused is a first offender, had been in custody for 1 year and 9 months, three years imprisonment is considered adequate. So it is ordered.

'11/1996