Uganda v Mubuke and Another (Criminal Appeal 28 of 2017) [2021] UGHCCRD 92 (7 October 2021)

# **THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA**

### **CRIMINAL APPEAL No 28 OF 2017**

#### **(Arising from Nakawa Magistrates Court Case No 468 of 2014)**

**UGANDA :::::::::::::::::::::::: APPELLANT**

*vs*

# **1. MUBUKE JOHH 2. KAWERE JOHN ::::::::::::::::::::::: RESPONDENT**

## **BEFORE: HON. MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ELUBU**

## **JUDGMENT**

This is an appeal lodged by the State against the judgment and orders of **HW Nantege Christine,** Magistrate Grade I, who acquitted the respondents on a charge of Malicious Damage to Property c/s 335 of **the Penal Code Act (PCA)**.

The brief background is that the appellant being dissatisfied with the findings of the lower Court lodged this appeal on the 8th of February 2017. The matter first came up for hearing on the 28th of May 2018. On that date the appellant counsel and the complainant were present in court but the respondents had not been served and were both absent. The appellant was granted an adjournment to file a memorandum of appeal and also to serve the respondents. The hearing was adjourned to the 20th of June 2018. On the 20th of June 2018 the Respondents were absent and had still not been served. The State Attorney applied to have the matter

withdrawn because the facts showed the case was more of a civil dispute than a criminal case. The appeal was withdrawn but within a few hours the complainant protested and the appeal was reinstated. From then to date, the hearing has been adjourned on the following dates: 11th of July 2018, 4th of September 2018, 11th of September 2018, 30th of August 2020 and 25th of July 2021.

On all the stated dates the respondents have been absent for lack of service. The Appellant has always sought for an adjournment to have the respondents served. Despite the keen interest shown by the complainant at the beginning no service has ever been effected.

On the 15th of September 2020, the appellant filed written submissions. Those submissions are on record but were not served on the respondents.

In light of the foregoing however, it would not be in the interest of justice to proceed with this appeal in these circumstances where respondents have never been traced or served.

In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed.

**………………………………..**

**Michael Elubu**

**Judge**

**7.10.2021**