[2013] KEHC 5369 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant's mental condition constituted an exceptional circumstance warranting the grant of bail pending appeal. Without delving into the merits of the substantive appeal, the court held that a prima facie case had been made for the orders sought. The court emphasized that its duty at this...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 5369 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Charles Wanjohi Karue; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 6 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Bail Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Appellant released on bail pending appeal.
- Judges
- J Wakiaga
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Appeal, Mental Capacity of Accused, Sexual Offences, Exceptional Circumstances
- 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 Wanjohi Karue
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Bail Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to bail pending appeal under section 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the appellant's mental condition constitutes an exceptional circumstance justifying release on bail pending appeal.
- 3 Whether the appeal has overwhelming chances of success.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant's mental condition constituted an exceptional circumstance warranting the grant of bail pending appeal. Without delving into the merits of the substantive appeal, the court held that a prima facie case had been made for the orders sought. The court emphasized that its duty at this stage was limited to the bail application and not the substantive appeal, and that the appellant's inability to communicate and low intelligence were significant factors justifying release on bail.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Appellant released on bail pending appeal.
Orders
- The appellant be released on bond of Ksh. 100,000 with one surety of similar amount or in the alternative cash bail of Ksh. 50,000.
- The appellant to appear in court for hearing or before the Deputy Registrar of this court for mention once every month, with the first such mention on 25th February 2013.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Nyeri
Criminal Appeal 6 of 2012 [if gte mso 9]><xml>
14. 00
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-US X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; text-autospace:ideograph-other; font-size:12. 0pt;"Liberation Serif","serif";} </style> <![endif]
CHARLES WANJOHI KARUE...................................................APPELLANT
Versus
REPUBLIC.............................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The application before court is notice of motion brought under section 357 of CPC for orders that the applicant/appellant be released on bail pending the hearing of the appeal.
2. It is supported by the applicant's advocate affidavit sworn on 11th July 2012 in which it is deponed that the trial magistrate erred in law by holding that the offence of indecent act was committed without addressing the mind of the court on the provisions of the Sexual Offences Act.
3. At the hearing hereof Mr. Kiminda submitted that this appeal has overwhelming chances of success in that there was no contact between the sex organs of the minor and any other part of the body of the appellant other than the allegation that the appellant inserted his fingers in the private parts of the complainant.
4. That P.W.4 only saw the appellant holding the minor but did not see whether her pants were removed and that since he was released on the main charges his conviction was founded on suspicion that he was seen on the complainant's home and was holding her.
5. It was further submitted that the appellant was also held in custody for a longer period which issue the trial court did not take into account noting that the appellant was unrepresented.
6. It was further submitted that the appellant has a low intelligence and therefore he did not even ask any question nor offered any evidence.
7. Miss Ngalyuka for the state seems to have agreed with Mr. Kiminda that court did not take into account the appellant's mental capacity since the advocates on record had indicated to the court that the same could not communicate.
8. It must be pointed out that the duty of the court is only to deal with the application at hand and not the substantive appeal and that the main principle to be considered is whether the appeal has such overwhelming chances of success, that whether there are exceptional unusual circumstances.
9. I am of the considered opinion the appellant mental condition is an exceptional circumstance and without going into the merits of the appeal there is a prima facie case made for the grant of orders sought.
10. I therefore allow the application herein and order that the appellant be released on bail pending appeal on the following terms:
a. Bond of Ksh. 100,000/- with one surety of similar amount or in the alternative cash bail of Ksh. 50,000/-
b. The appellant to appear in court for hearing or before theDeputy Registrar of this court for mention once every month with the first such mention on 25th February 2013.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 24th day of January, 2013.
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE
Miss Wamahiu for Mr. Kiminda for appellant
Miss Maundu for the state.
Ruling read in open court in the presence of the above named.
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE