Yesterday lead Pastor of House of Prayer Ministries International Aloysious Bujingo was introduced to the parents of his girl friend Suzan Makula Nantaba in a flashy and high budget event that attracted big shots in government and the entertainment industry in Uganda.
Bugingo who parted ways with his wife Teddy Naluswa Bugingo in 2019 who he had been with for close to 30 years after finding love in his employee and church girl Suzan Makula. He had four children with his old wife.
His marriage woes ended up in the media with wife Eddy accusing Bugingo of abandoning his family responsibilities, she also accused him of infidelity which prompted the Canan land boss to spit fire claiming he only left home, settled with a new woman but continues to take full responsibility of his children.
The two are in court with Bugingo battling to divorce Teddy who has vowed never to sign the divorce papers because she still his official wife, she still loves him and she has hope God will answer her prayers and bring her estranged husband back.
However, before the two enjoy their romantic moments and we settle for the fact that Bugingo offered Makula blessings instead of an engagement ring like it’s always the custom during traditional Introduction ceremonies, he’s been dragged to court by Lawyer Male Mabirizi for engaging in a new marriage before dissolving the existing one with his wife Teddy.
According to the Charge sheet seen by this website, Mabirizi says It’s criminal for Bugingo to go ahead and marry another wife yet he’s still legally married to another wife. Also, it was criminal for Makula to accept getting married to Bugingo yet she knew he was legally married to Teddy Naluswa whom he hasn’t divorced yet.
Mabilizi in the criminal summons against Bugingo and Makula sites the Marriage Act, Cap 251 S.42 which state that “Any person who, being unmarried goes through the celemony of marriage with a person who he/she knows to be married to another person, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years”
He also sights S.50 of the same act which states that “Any person who, having contracted marriage under this Act or any modification or reenactment of this Act, during the continuance of that marriage contracts a marriage in accordance with customary law commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years”
