[2004] KEHC 1028 (KLR)
The court found that the appellants had an arguable appeal and that if they were to serve their sentences before the appeal was determined, the appeal could be rendered nugatory should it succeed. The court also noted the applicants' good conduct during the trial, including their compliance with bond terms and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KEHC 1028 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Davis Nzongo Liu; Appellant: Elizabeth Mueni; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 126 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Bail Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for bail pending appeal allowed; sentence stayed.
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Appeal, Stay of Sentence, Appeal Procedure
- 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
Davis Nzongo Liu
Appellant
Elizabeth Mueni
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Bail Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellants should be granted bail pending the determination of their consolidated criminal appeal.
- 2 Whether the sentence should be stayed to prevent the appeal from being rendered nugatory.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellants had an arguable appeal and that if they were to serve their sentences before the appeal was determined, the appeal could be rendered nugatory should it succeed. The court also noted the applicants' good conduct during the trial, including their compliance with bond terms and regular court attendance. The State did not oppose the application. In light of these factors, the court exercised its discretion to grant bail pending appeal and ordered a stay of the sentence, subject to the appellants posting bond with surety.
Court Disposition
Application for bail pending appeal allowed; sentence stayed.
Orders
- Each appellant to be released on bond of KES 100,000 with one surety of like sum.
- Appellants to appear before the court for mentions during the pendency of the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
12 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MACHAKOS
APPELLATE SIDE
HIGH COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 126 OF 2004 DAVIS NZONGO LIU :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: RESPONDENT
(From the Original Conviction(s) and Sentence(s) in Criminal Case No. 787 of 2001 of Chief Magistrate’s Court at Machakos: S.M. KIBUNJA on 15/7/04 R U L I N G By a Chamber Summons dated 24/7/04 the applicants Davis Nzongo Liu appellant in Criminal Appeal 126/04 and Elizabeth Mueni appellant in Criminal Appeal 128/04 pray that the court do admit them to bail and that the sentence be stayed upon such terms as are just pending appeal.
The two appeals 126/04 and 128/04 were consolidated to proceed as Criminal Appeal 126/04.
The grounds upon which the application is filed are that the appellants have high chances of success in their appeal; that the appellants stand to suffer irreparably if their appeals succeeds after serving sentence and the appeals would, therefore, be rendered nugatory;
that they are sole breadwinners for their families and always attended court during the pendency of the case in which they are serving sentence and they will be willing to provide any security that the court orders.
The applicants filed affidavits in support of this application in which the grounds are reiterated. The State did not oppose the application. I have noted that the case before the lower court took about 4 years before completion. The appellants were on bond. The court does not seem to have had any problem with their attendance.
The applicants were fined Ksh. 50,000/- each in default 2 years imprisonment. The sentence runs with effect from 15/7/2004 which is only 3½ months ago. I have had a chance to read part of the bulky proceedings of the lower court and in my view the applicants have an arguable appeal which would be rendered nugatory were they let to serve the prison terms and the appeal succeeds.
Accordingly I do order that each of them be released on bond of 100,000/- each with one surety of like sum. The appellants appear before this court for mentions during the pendency of the appeal. Dated at Machakos this 17th day of November 2004 R.V. WENDOH JUDGE