Mukono court halts forgery trial over land row
Justice Stephen Mubiru stayed the criminal case against Hassan Kawalya, who is facing charges of forgery and uttering a false document before the Buganda Road Chief Magistrate’s Court.
Mukono court halts forgery trial over land row
_____________________
The High Court in Mukono has halted the prosecution of a man accused of forging a grant of letters of administration, ruling that the criminal justice system was being weaponised to gain an advantage in a long-running land dispute.
Justice Stephen Mubiru stayed the criminal case against Hassan Kawalya, who is facing charges of forgery and uttering a false document before the Buganda Road Chief Magistrate’s Court.
The judge ordered that Criminal Case No. 548 of 2024 be stayed until the final determination of a related civil suit over about 10 acres of disputed land in Mukono or further orders of the court.
Justice Mubiru said the criminal prosecution was being used as a tactical weapon to put pressure on Kawalya and his family in a dispute involving competing claims to the land.
“When a prosecution targets a person for the wrong reasons, it turns the legal system into a weapon,” Justice Mubiru said.
The judge said the criminal proceedings were closely intertwined with a decades-old dispute over ownership of land formerly comprised in Kyaggwe MRV 39 Folio 22 and now known as Kyaggwe Block 80 Plot 129 in Buntaba, Ddundu and Kiryamuli, Mukono district.
Two families claim ownership of the land, each tracing its title to different historical transactions.
The respondents claim the land belonged to their late grandfather, Bukulu Misusera, who allegedly bought it from Laurensiyo Lumu, with the title transferred into his name in 1981.
Kawalya, on the other hand, claims the land belongs to the estate of his late grandfather, Jafali Kalanzi, who allegedly bought it in 1931 from Yonasani Magoba.
The competing claims resulted in two sets of titles and subdivisions of the same land.
The respondents subdivided the land into several plots, while Kawalya and his brother, Senteza Abbas, subdivided it into Plots 525, 526 and 527.
The Director of Public Prosecutions subsequently charged Kawalya with forgery and uttering a false document.
The criminal case was filed in 2024 and had been mentioned about 20 times, with the hearing scheduled to begin on August 5, 2026, before Buganda Road Chief Magistrate Ritah Neumbe Kidasa.
Kawalya then asked the High Court to stop the prosecution, arguing that the criminal case was being used to intimidate him and give the complainants an advantage in the land dispute.
He argued that the prosecution was irrational, unreasonable and brought in bad faith, maintaining that the alleged forgery was inseparable from the wider dispute over ownership of the land.
The DPP and Inspector General of Police opposed the application, insisting that the prosecution was based on thorough police investigations and an independent review by the Office of the DPP.
The State argued that the applicant was merely challenging the strength of the evidence against him, which should be determined during the criminal trial.
The DPP said investigations established that the grant allegedly used by Kawalya to secure registration of the land was forged.
The State said the High Court Family Division had been consulted and confirmed that the case number appearing on the disputed grant belonged to another deceased person and not Jafali Kalanzi.
The prosecution argued that the alleged forgery involved a court document and was therefore a matter of public interest requiring prosecution.
He noted that both sides claimed ownership and had obtained competing titles and subdivisions, while the civil court was yet to determine which of the two claims was valid.
The judge said the respondents’ actions and the timing of the prosecution raised concerns that the criminal case was being used to weaken Kawalya’s position and exert pressure on him.
He observed that the alleged forgery dated back to 2010, while the criminal case was only filed in 2024 amid the continuing land dispute.
Justice Mubiru said the prosecution appeared to be part of a broader strategy to secure possession of the disputed land after establishing the validity of the respondents’ titles and having the rival title holders prosecuted.
He said the criminal justice system should not be used to settle complex land disputes that belong before civil courts.
“Criminal courts should not be converted into land registries or tribunals to determine the authenticity of rival land titles and competing historical root-of-title claims,” he said.
The judge said criminal proceedings should serve legitimate justice objectives and not be used to gain leverage in civil disputes or pursue personal vendettas.
He ruled that the prosecution of Kawalya was an inappropriate use of the criminal justice system to address a complex civil dispute over land ownership.
“Permitting a criminal trial to proceed tangentially on a core property dispute brings the administration of justice into disrepute and risks conflicting findings with legitimate land ownership laws,” Justice Mubiru said.
Although the judge declined to grant Kawalya the orders of certiorari and prohibition because the application had been filed out of time and the remedies were improperly sought through an interlocutory application, he invoked the court’s inherent powers to prevent abuse of its process.
He consequently stayed further proceedings in Criminal Case No. 548 of 2024 until the final determination of Mukono High Court Civil Suit No. 0244 of 2025 or further orders of the court.
The costs of the application will abide the outcome of the civil suit.