Court denies aggravated defilement suspect bail
Acting High Court Judge Deepa Verma dismissed a bail application filed by Shafiq Bukenya, who is charged with aggravated defilement contrary to Sections 116(3) and (4)(a) of the Penal Code Act.
Shafiq Bukenya is accused of performing a sexual act with a minor (name withheld) on June 22, 2024, at Nabubuzi village, Kamengo subcounty in Mpigi district. (File photo)
________________
The High Court in Mpigi has denied bail to a 28-year-old man accused of aggravated defilement, saying he failed to prove that he had a fixed place of abode and substantial sureties capable of ensuring his attendance in court.
Acting High Court Judge Deepa Verma dismissed a bail application filed by Shafiq Bukenya, who is charged with aggravated defilement contrary to Sections 116(3) and (4)(a) of the Penal Code Act.
Bukenya is accused of performing a sexual act with a minor (name withheld) on June 22, 2024, at Nabubuzi village, Kamengo subcounty in Mpigi district.
The accused, who is on remand at Kigo Prison, had asked the court to release him on bail pending trial, arguing that he had substantial sureties, a fixed place of abode and was the breadwinner of his family.
He also told the court that he was willing to comply with any bail conditions and would not abscond.
However, the prosecution opposed the application, arguing that the offence carries a maximum sentence of death and that the severity of the punishment could motivate the accused to abscond.
The State also argued that the proposed sureties were not substantial and had not demonstrated their ability to ensure Bukenya's attendance in court.
In her ruling, Justice Verma said although the Constitution guarantees an accused person the right to apply for bail, the right is neither absolute nor automatic.
The judge noted that Bukenya had relied on an LC1 letter from Mugongo B cell, Kasenge ward, Kyengera town council in Wakiso district, to prove his place of residence.
However, she found that the letter did not indicate how long he had lived in the area, whether he was a tenant or landlord, or the nature of his occupation.
Justice Verma also noted that Bukenya had failed to provide proper identification, such as a national identity card, passport, employment identification or driving permit.
She said proper identification was important in ensuring that the accused could be traced in case he absconded.
The judge further rejected the proposed sureties, noting inconsistencies in the documents presented by one of them.
She said while Frank Matovu stated in his affidavit that he lived in Bwamulamira, Kamengo in Mpigi district, the LC1 letter he presented was from Ndoddo village, Kamengo parish, Kamengo subcounty.
Justice Verma said no explanation had been given for the discrepancy, which raised doubts about the surety's actual place of residence and his reliability.
The court also considered the period Bukenya had spent on remand, noting that he had been in custody since July 5, 2024, for approximately two years.
The court heard that Bukenya took plea on June 30, 2026, and that a preliminary hearing was conducted on July 14, 2026.
On the same day, the prosecution presented the victim as its first witness and indicated that it had three witnesses in total.
Justice Verma said the case had also come up on July 27, 2026, when the State presented another witness and undertook to call the remaining witnesses.
She said the progress of the trial demonstrated that the matter was actively being prosecuted and could be concluded promptly.
“In my considered view, the interests of justice in this case do not favour granting bail at this stage; rather, they demand that the trial be prioritised and concluded without undue delay,” Justice Verma ruled.
She directed that the trial be given early hearing dates to ensure its expeditious conclusion.
The judge further ordered that if the case was not concluded during the current criminal session, it should be given priority hearing every Tuesday, the designated day for criminal matters, until its final determination.
Justice Verma consequently dismissed Bukenya's bail application.
“If the case is not concluded within the current criminal session, it shall be accorded priority hearing on every Tuesday, being the designated day for criminal matters, until its final determination,” she ordered.