[2020] KEHC 1343 (KLR)
The court dismissed the application because the applicant failed to provide evidence of pauperism or to raise any points of law that would warrant consideration in a second appeal. Furthermore, the application was not supported by a sworn affidavit, rendering it procedurally incompetent. The court found no merit in...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 1343 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Charles Ochieng Otieno; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E011 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Second Appeal, Pauperism, Court of Appeal Rules, Affidavit Requirement
- 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
Charles Ochieng Otieno
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant qualifies for pauper status under Rule 113 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
- 2 Whether there are points of law warranting consideration in a second appeal.
- 3 Whether the application is competent without a supporting affidavit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court dismissed the application because the applicant failed to provide evidence of pauperism or to raise any points of law that would warrant consideration in a second appeal. Furthermore, the application was not supported by a sworn affidavit, rendering it procedurally incompetent. The court found no merit in the application and ordered its dismissal, closing the file accordingly.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
- File closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT SIAYA
MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. E011 OF 2020
CORAM: HON. R.E. ABURILI J
CHARLES OCHIENG OTIENO.................................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC...............................................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. I have considered the Application under Rule 113 of Court of Appeal Rules.
2. I find no evidence of pauperism or points of law for consideration in a second appeal.
3. The Application is unsupported by any sworn affidavit.
4. The same is hereby dismissed.
5. File closed.
6. Orders accordingly.
Dated, signed and Delivered at Siaya, this 16th Day of November, 2020
R.E. ABURILI
JUDGE