Uganda v Twerinde Dennis and Phaphius Karwize (Revision Case No. 17/95) [1996] UGHC 71 (1 July 1996)

## THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

## IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

## REVISION CR CASE NO. $17/95$

#### (ARISING OUT OF CR. CASE NO. MKAT 7/93)

## **KABAIE**

UGANDA : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

#### VERSUS

TWERINDE DENNIS Ō ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::ACCUSED

2. PHAPHIAS KARWIZE

# I REFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE I. MUKANZA.

#### REVISIONAL ORDER/CONFIRMATION

This file was passed over to me with a view to confirmation of sentence as provided for under section 167 of the Magistrate's Court $\sim$ $\sim$ $\sim$

Act 1970.

$\cdot$ , $\cdot$

The accused Twerinde Deus and another were charged of the following $\ldots \cdots$ offences =

$\mathcal{L} \mathcal{L}$

$\ldots\ldots\,$

"Theft contrary to section 252 of the penal code. In the alternative they were charged with the offence of receiving or retaining stolen property contrary to section 198(1) of the penal code Act."

The particulars of the offences were that Twerinde Deus and another one at the stadium in Kabale District stole a bag, a shirt, canvass, shoes, jacket and a trouser valued at shillings 40.000/= the property of Seburu and in the alternative they received the same having reason $-1$ to believe the same to have been feloniously stolen.

The accused Twerinde pleaded guilty to the charge and was convicted on his own plea of guilty to the theft charge and was sentenced to six strokes.

According to the facts of the case the accused admitted all the ingredients of the offence and I am satisfied that he was properly convicted. A person convicted of theft is liable to imprisonment for 5 years.

The accused being a younger offender under the apparent age of 18 years no sentence of imprisonment could be passed on him see section 190 (1) MCA 1970. $.../2$

However under S 191(3) whenever a male person under the age of sixteen years is convicted of any offence for which he is liable to imprisonment the court may in its discretion sentence him to corporal punishment in addition to or in substitution for my punishment to which he is liable.

de para la constituira del

사람은 이번 내 한 2개 : 국가로

$\cdots \cdots \cdots$

$\mathbf{1} \leftarrow \mathbf{1} \mathbf{1} \cdots \mathbf{1} \mathbf{1}$

$\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot$

$\mathbf{L} = \mathbf{L}^{\mathbf{A}} \mathbf{L}^{\mathbf{A}} \mathbf{L}^{\mathbf{A}} \mathbf{L}^{\mathbf{A}} \mathbf{L}^{\mathbf{A}} \mathbf{L}^{\mathbf{A}}$

The particulars of the charge sheet do show that the accused is stated to be 16 years old and not under the age of 16 years. Corporal punishment $\sim$ $\sim$ $\sim$ of six years strokes of the cane could not therefore be passed on him. The sentence was therefore illegal. When the DPP was contacted about the matter his reply reference NO. DPP/02/1 dated 3.11.95 addressed to the Assistant Registrar Crime had this to say -

> "The case papers reveal that the accused person NO.1 Twerinde was 16 years at the time he committed the offence. He pleaded guilty to the offence of theft and was.sentenced to six strokes of the cane on his own plea. This sentence in my view is illegal because the accused was 16 years and under section 191(3) MCA he could not have corporal punishment administered on him. In the event of a revisional order being made the Director of Public Prosecution does not wish to be heard. $\mathbf{u}$ and $\mathbf{v}$ and $\mathbf{v}$ are $\mathbf{u}$ .

From what has transpired above as I stated earlier on the sentence of $\mathcal{L} = \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L}$ six strokes of the cane passed on the accused NO.1 Twerinder is illegal in a prime to the second of the second $\mathcal{L} = \mathcal{L} \oplus \mathcal{L}$ and the same is set aside. It is not clear whether the corporal punishment has been implemented or not. In case it has not the accused be cautioned $\mathbf{a} = \mathbf{a} \mathbf{a} \mathbf{a}$ under S 202(1) of the MCA 1979. The court record is therefore remitted $\mathbf{1} \cdot \mathbf{1} = \mathbf{1} \cdot \mathbf{1} \cdot \mathbf{1} = \mathbf{1} \cdot \mathbf{1} \cdot \mathbf{1}$ back to Kabale with a view to comply with the order. $\alpha_{11}$ , $\alpha_{12}$ , $\beta_{13}$ , $\beta_{14}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ , $\beta_{15}$ ,

I. MUKANZA

JUDGE

$1.5 \times 1.7.1996 \times 1.4 \times 10^{11} \text{ m}$

**SET A SET A**

$\mathbf{a} \rightarrow \mathbf{a} \quad \mathbf{a} \quad \mathbf{b} \quad \mathbf{c} \quad \mathbf{a} \quad \mathbf{b} \quad \mathbf{a} \quad \mathbf{b} \quad \mathbf{b} \quad \mathbf{c} \quad \mathbf{c} \quad \mathbf{c} \quad \mathbf{c} \quad \mathbf{c} \quad \mathbf{c} \quad \mathbf{c}$

$\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{A}} = \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{A}}$

$\mathbf{x} \mapsto \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mapsto \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mapsto \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mapsto \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mapsto \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mapsto \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mapsto \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y}} \mapsto \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{y$

$\cdots \cdots$

a management of the third to the management

$\cdots \cdots \cdots$