https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10391

Arati v Director of Public Prosecutions & another (Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E085 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 10391 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (10 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 10391 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts) Judicial Review Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E085 of 2026 WM Musyoka, J July 10, 2026 Between Abraham Choti Arati Applicant and The Director of Public Prosecutions 1st Respondent The Hon. Attorney General 2nd Respondent Ruling 1.The ex parte chamber summons, dated 11th June 2026, was placed before me on 12th June 2026, in chambers, for consideration of the grant of the leave and stay sought, which I declined, before hearing both sides, on the matter. I directed, instead, that the filings, dated 11th June 2026, be served on the respondents, and that the ex parte chamber summons be argued orally, on 22nd June 2026. 2.Service was effected, and the parties appeared before me, through their respective Advocates, on 22nd June 2026, but the matter did not proceed that day, as the 1st respondent requested for time, to file papers. I acceded to that request, and put off the matter to 30th June 2026, when oral arguments were taken. 3.The 1st respondent, through an affidavit sworn by No. 241418 Police Inspector Francis Gitau, the investigating officer, on 19th June 2026, responded to the application. He gives a background to what transpired. A building, under construction, collapsed, killing 2 people. Investigations were conducted, and the police established a reasonable basis, according to the deponent, for the prosecution of the applicant, hence the intention and decision to press charges against him. 4.Prof. Ojienda, Senior Counsel, urged the case for the ex parte applicant, and pleaded for grant of the leave sought, and that the grant of leave, if at all, do operate as a stay of the impugned decision. Mr. Mulati, for the 1st respondent, opposed the application, and urged me not to grant the leave sought. 5.After hearing the Advocates for the parties, on the ex parte application, and considering the filings on record, I am persuaded that the ex parte applicant should be afforded an opportunity to have his day in court, to present his case against the decision to have him prosecuted, for the reasons advanced. I shall, as I hereby do, accordingly, grant the leave sought, in terms of prayer 2 of the said ex parte chamber summons. The leave granted shall be for 7 days, within which the ex parte applicant shall file and serve the substantive motion, in a separate substantive judicial review cause. The grant of leave herein shall operate as a stay, in terms of prayer 3 of the ex parte chamber summons. 6.Upon being served, the respondents shall, if so minded, file and serve their respective responses to the said motion, within 7 days, from the date of service. The matter shall, thereafter, be mentioned, on 28th July 2026, for compliance, and further directions with respect to written submissions. On the said date, directions shall also be taken on the closure of the instant miscellaneous file. Orders accordingly. DELIVERED VIA CTS, DATED AND SIGNED IN CHAMBERS, AT MILIMANI, NAIROBI, ON THIS 10TH DAY OF JULY 2026.W MUSYOKAJUDGEMr. Abdirahman, Court Assistant.AdvocatesProf. Ojienda, SC/Ms. Misati, instructed by Prof. Tom Ojienda & Associates, Advocates for the ex parte applicant.Mr. Oruko/Mr. Mulati, instructed by the Director of Public Prosecutions, for the 1st respondent.