[2020] KEHC 4181 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 4181 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide evidence of having filed a Notice of Appeal in time and did not demonstrate any points of law to be advanced on the intended second appeal. Additionally, the applicant did not provide material evidence to support his claim of pauperism. Consequently, the court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 4181 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Charles Otando Okello; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Siaya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application 20 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Out of Time Application, Sexual Offences, Pauperism, Notice of Appeal, Defilement
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Leave to Appeal Out of Time Application Sexual Offences Pauperism Notice of Appeal Defilement

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Otando Okello

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant grant of leave to appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether there is evidence of timely filing of Notice of Appeal by the applicant.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has established grounds of pauperism to justify the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide evidence of having filed a Notice of Appeal in time and did not demonstrate any points of law to be advanced on the intended second appeal. Additionally, the applicant did not provide material evidence to support his claim of pauperism. Consequently, the court held that the application lacked merit and dismissed it.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • File closed.