https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/13036
The court declined to extend the stay orders because the complainant was elderly and willing to testify, no prejudice would be suffered by the accused if she appeared in the trial court, and the applicant could still challenge her evidence through cross-examination and raise identity issues before the trial court;...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 13036 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: ABDUL HASSAN TAHALIL; 1st Respondent: Director of Public Prosecution; 2nd Respondent: Directorate of Criminal Investigations
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application E104 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Hearing Date and Stay Orders
- Outcome
- Stay orders not extended; matter adjourned; lower court trial to proceed
- Judges
- ["AM Muteti"]
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Proceedings, Delay of Trial, Victims' Rights, Right to Fair Hearing, Cross Examination, Witness Appearance, Age/advanced Age of Complainant
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
ABDUL HASSAN TAHALIL
Applicant
Director of Public Prosecution
1st Respondent
Directorate of Criminal Investigations
2nd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Hearing Date and Stay Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether to extend stay orders stopping the lower court trial
- 2 Whether the applicant was delaying the matter
- 3 Whether the complainant should be required to testify in the lower court despite objections
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined to extend the stay orders because the complainant was elderly and willing to testify, no prejudice would be suffered by the accused if she appeared in the trial court, and the applicant could still challenge her evidence through cross-examination and raise identity issues before the trial court; the lower court trial was therefore allowed to proceed without delay.
Court Disposition
Stay orders not extended; matter adjourned; lower court trial to proceed
Orders
- Application for extension of stay orders declined.
- Matter adjourned to 24th September 2026 for hearing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MILIMANI** **CRIMINAL MISC APPL. NO. E104 OF 2026.** **ABDUL HASSAN TAHALIL------------------------------------------- APPLICANT** **VERSUS** **DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION-------------------1ST RESPONDENT** **DIRECTORATE OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS----2ND RESPONDENT** **RULING** The matter came up for Hearing today but the applicant was not ready to proceed. They requested for another date to prosecute the application. The Interested party was opposed to any extension of the stay orders stating that the applicant is bent on stalling the lower court matter. The argument being that the intention of the Applicant is to delay the trial. The complainant has been before this court and she obviously is a lady who is within the bracket of persons contemplated under **Article 57** of the **Constitution**. The court has observed that from her demeanor, she is willing to appear before any court and testify. This court is thus not inclined to extend the stay orders considering her advanced age. If the applicant has any issue about her identity, that should be an issue for the trial court during the hearing. Fair hearing is not only for the accused persons in a trial but also for the victims too. No prejudice will be suffered by the accused if the complainant appears and testifies in the lower court. The Applicant will have an opportunity to cross examine her on all issues in line with the provisions of **Article 50 (2)** of the **Constitution**. It is unfair to keep a litigant of the complainants age waiting as parties canvass legal issues before this court. Let the complainant have her day in court and the Applicant will still have an opportunity to canvass the legal issue they raise in their application before this court at a later date. The matter is adjourned to 24th September 2026 for Hearing. The trial in the lower court shall proceed without delay and the prosecution should avail the complainant at the first instance before the trial court to give evidence. It is so ordered. **DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED VIRTUALLY at NAIROBI this 17th day of AUGUST 2026**. **A. M. MUTETI** **JUDGE** **In the presence of:** Habiba: Court Assistant Kubo for the Applicant Mogere for the Respondent