[2014] KEHC 4479 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was present and represented by counsel during the relevant proceedings, and that both the applicant and the surety were heard before the magistrate made the impugned orders. Upon review of the lower court record, the High Court was satisfied that there was no irregularity,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 4479 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Bonventure Aradi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Case 50 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Revision of Magistrate's Orders
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- GO Shikwe
- Legal Topics
- Revision Jurisdiction, Fair Hearing, Criminal Procedure Code Section 362
- 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
Bonventure Aradi
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Revision of Magistrate's Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the orders issued by the Chief Magistrate on 5th June, 2014 were irregular or unprocedural.
- 2 Whether the applicant was accorded a fair hearing before the orders were made.
- 3 Whether the High Court should exercise its revisionary jurisdiction under Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was present and represented by counsel during the relevant proceedings, and that both the applicant and the surety were heard before the magistrate made the impugned orders. Upon review of the lower court record, the High Court was satisfied that there was no irregularity, illegality, or procedural impropriety in the magistrate's decision. The applicant was accorded a fair hearing, and the circumstances did not justify the exercise of the High Court's revisionary jurisdiction under Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Consequently, the application for revision was dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 9th June, 2014 is dismissed.
- The file to be returned to the trial magistrate immediately as it has a mention date for today.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MOMBASA
MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 50 OF 2014
BONVENTURE ARADI …..........................…...APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC ..................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
The Notice of Motion application dated 9th June, 2014 and which is expressed to be brought under Section 131 of the criminal Procedure Code seeks orders for the reversal and or setting aside of the orders issued by the Honourbale Chief Magistrate in Mombasa Criminal Case number 3900 of 2008 on 5th June, 2014.
The grounds are that the orders made by the magistrate were irregular and unprocedural as he never accorded the applicant the opportunity to show cause.
I have called for and perused the record of the lower Court and in particular the proceedings of 23rd May, 2014. It is noted that the Accused was present and represented by Ratemo Advocate who informed the Court that the Accused was attending psychiatric treatment and was suffering from chronic depression.
It was argued that his absence was caused by his medical condition. The surety also testified and intimated that the Accused had not informed him that he was suffering from mental illness. The surety was discharged and the Court reserved its ruling which it delivered on 5th June, 2014.
I am satisfied that the Accused was accorded a fair hearing.
Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code donates power to the High Court to call for records and provides,
“The High Court may call for and examine the record of any Criminal proceedings before any subordinate Court for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, Sentence or order recorded or passed and as to the regularity if any proceedings of any such subordinate Court”.
Upon perusal of the records in the lower Court I find no irregularity and or illegality occasioned so as to persuade this Court to invoke its powers of revision. The application has no merit and its dismissed. The file to be returned to the trial magistrate immediately as it has a mention date for today.
Ruing delivered, dated and signed in open Court this 19th day of June, 2014.
…...................
M. MUYA
JUDGE
19TH JUNE, 2014
In the presence of:-
The Court clerk
Absence of the Advocate.