https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1633

Wekesa v Republic (Criminal Application E019 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1633 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KECA 1633 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Court of Appeal at Eldoret Criminal Application E019 of 2026 L Ndolo, JA July 31, 2026 Between Abraham Wafula Wekesa Applicant and Republic Respondent (Application for leave to appeal out of time against the Judgement of the High Court of Kenya at Kitale (H. Chemitei J.) delivered on 18th October 2019 in HCCR No 42 of 2011) Ruling 1.By an undated Chamber Summons and a supporting affidavit dated 5th May 2026, the applicant seeks extension of time to file an appeal out of time. In explaining the delay in filing his appeal, the applicant states that he had relied on his relatives who had promised to instruct a lawyer to represent him, which did not happen due to financial constraints. 2.The respondent, vide submissions dated 29th June 2026, filed by Learned Prosecution Counsel, Ms. Kisui Grace Wavinya supports the application stating that the reason for delay advanced by the applicant is plausible. Relying on this Court’s decision in Enono vs Republic [2025] KECA 355 (KLR) and Kimanga vs Republic [2025] KECA 354 KLR counsel urges the Court to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant. 3.Although by its submissions dated 29th June 2026, the respondent does not oppose the applicant’s application, the Court retains the discretion whether or not to extend time and this discretion is to be exercised in accordance with established legal principles. 4.In addressing the question of extension of time, the Supreme Court, in its decision in Andrew Kiplagat Chemaringo vs Paul Kipkorir Kibet [2018] eKLR stated that:“The law does not set out any minimum or maximum period of delay. All it states is that any delay should be satisfactorily explained. A plausible and satisfactory explanation for the delay is the key that unlocks the court’s flow of discretionary favour. There has to be valid and clear reasons, upon which discretion can be favourably exercisable.” 5.I have considered the application, the supporting affidavit and submissions by both the applicant and the respondent. The applicant was convicted of the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code, by a judgment delivered on 18th October 2019. Going by his affidavit in support of the application, his plea for extension of time was brought close to seven years down the line. This is a long delay; I am however minded to consider the limited resources available to the applicant who is serving sentence in prison. 6.In light of this, I will exercise discretion in favour of the applicant with directions that he will file a notice of appeal within the next 14 days from the date of this ruling. Thereafter, the Deputy Registrar of Kitale High Court will prepare and serve the record of appeal on the appellant and the respondent, within 30 days. 7.I direct that a copy of this ruling be served upon the Deputy Registrar, Kitale High Court. DATED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2026.L.M. NDOLO…………………………………JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a true copy of the original.SignedDEPUTY REGISTRAR