[2018] KEHC 7208 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had exhausted his right of appeal up to the Court of Appeal, satisfying the first limb of Article 50(6). However, the applicant failed to demonstrate the existence of new and compelling evidence that has become available after the conclusion of his appeals. The allegation regarding...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 7208 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Aggrey Lihanda Mwajaka; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Case 15 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Retrial After Exhaustion of Appeals
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- AN Makau
- Legal Topics
- Retrial Applications, New and Compelling Evidence, Fair Trial Rights
- 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
Aggrey Lihanda Mwajaka
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Retrial After Exhaustion of Appeals
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a retrial under Article 50(6) of the Constitution.
- 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated the existence of new and compelling evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had exhausted his right of appeal up to the Court of Appeal, satisfying the first limb of Article 50(6). However, the applicant failed to demonstrate the existence of new and compelling evidence that has become available after the conclusion of his appeals. The allegation regarding lack of witness statements was found to be untrue, as the trial record indicated that the accused was supplied with the statements and did not raise any objection at the time of hearing. The court concluded that the applicant did not meet the threshold for a retrial under Article 50(6) and therefore dismissed the application for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for retrial is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT SIAYA
H. MISC. CR. 15 OF 2017
(Formerly Ksm Pet No. 7 of 2017)
(Defilement)
(CORAM: J.A. MAKAU – J.)
AGGREY LIHANDA MWAJAKA...........................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC..............................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Applicant AGGREY LIHANDA MWAVAKA through a Notice of Motion filed on 18. 4.2017 seeks retrial following his conviction for an offence of defilement and sentence to life imprisonment.
2. That his appeal in High Court of Kenya at Kisumu, was dismissed on 21. 11. 2013, his appeal to Court of Appeal was similarly dismissed and as such urges he seeks retrial as he was not given a fair trial in that he was not informed in advance of the evidence the prosecution intended to rely on.
3. The application is supported by the Applicant’s supporting affidavit dated 28th March 2017, to which he has not attached the High Court judgment being H.C. Cr. A No. 25/2013, the Court of Appeal CR. A. No. 82 of 2014, which makes it difficult for this Court to know the nature of his grounds of appeal, and the decision of the two appellate Courts.
4. Article 50 (6) of the Constitution which is the basis of this application provides:
“30. (6) A person who is convicted of a criminal offence may petitionthe High Court for a new trial if—
(a) the person’s appeal, if any, has been dismissed by thehighest court to which the person is entitled to appeal, or the person did not appeal within the time allowed for appeal; and
(b) new and compelling evidence has become available.”
5. I have carefully considered the Applicant’s submissions in support of the application and those of the State Counsel, who opposed the application, it is indeed correct that the applicant was convicted of a criminal offence as he has attested in his application and exhausted all his right of appeal, to the highest Court of Appeal, however, in his application he has not demonstrated that a new and compelling evidence has become available to him after exhausting all his rights of appeal. His allegation that he was not supplied with witnesses statements is not true as the trial Magistrate’s Court on record review that on 7. 4.2014, it directed the Accused to be supplied with witnesses8 statements. That when the case came up for hearing on 8. 5.2014, all the Accused persons were ready to proceed and none of them raised the issue of lacking witnesses statements. It is not clear whether or not the issue of lack of witness’s statements was not dealt with in the two appeals. I find the applicant has not demonstrated that there is a new and compelling evidence which has now become available to him. I find he has not stated what new and compelling evidence he has unearthed to warrant granting his application.
6. In view of the above, I find the application devoid of merits and dismiss the same.
DATED AND SIGNED AT SIAYA THIS 19TH DAY OF APRIL 2018.
HON. J. A. MAKAU
JUDGE
Delivered in the open Court
In the Presence of:
No Appearance for Applicant
M/s. Odumba for State
Court Assistants:
1. Laban Odhiambo
2. Brenda Ochieng
HON. J. A. MAKAU
JUDGE