[2018] KEELC 3642 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 3642 (KLR)

The court held that judicial review is limited to examining the legality of the decision-making process, not the merits of the criminal charge. The applicant failed to provide substantive evidence that the police or the Director of Public Prosecutions acted in bad faith or abused their powers in instituting the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 3642 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Benjamin Kahindi Katana; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: Senior Resident Magistrate’s Court of Kilifi; Respondent: OCS Kilifi Police Station through the Inspector General of Police; Respondent: Mabete Properties Ltd
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application 6 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
JO Olola
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Prosecutorial Discretion, Forcible Detainer, Land Ownership Disputes
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Land and Property Judicial Review Prosecutorial Discretion Forcible Detainer Land Ownership Disputes

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Kahindi Katana

Applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Senior Resident Magistrate’s Court of Kilifi

Respondent

OCS Kilifi Police Station through the Inspector General of Police

Respondent

Mabete Properties Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the criminal proceedings against the applicant were instituted in bad faith and amount to an abuse of process.
  2. 2 Whether the court should grant orders of certiorari and prohibition to quash and halt the criminal proceedings in Kilifi Criminal Case No. 113 of 2015.
  3. 3 Whether the actions of the police and Director of Public Prosecutions violated the applicant's constitutional rights.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that judicial review is limited to examining the legality of the decision-making process, not the merits of the criminal charge. The applicant failed to provide substantive evidence that the police or the Director of Public Prosecutions acted in bad faith or abused their powers in instituting the criminal proceedings. The existence of a parallel civil suit over land ownership did not preclude the prosecution of the applicant for forcible detainer, as Section 193A of the Criminal Procedure Code expressly allows for concurrent civil and criminal proceedings. The court found no violation of the applicant's constitutional rights or abuse of process by the respondents....

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion application dated 7th March 2017 is dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.