https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1646
The Court exercised its discretion under Rule 4 and granted extension of time because the applicants explained the delay as arising from lack of legal representation and delay in obtaining proceedings, and the respondent did not oppose the application.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KECA 1646 (KLR)
- Parties
- 1st Applicant: Halkhu Dida Alias Shulka; 2nd Applicant: Bonaya Abkula; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Application E012 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Application / Appeal Out of Time Application
- Outcome
- Application allowed
- Judges
- ["PO Kiage"]
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Leave to File Appeal Out of Time, Delay in Filing Appeal, Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules
- 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
Halkhu Dida Alias Shulka
1st Applicant
Bonaya Abkula
2nd Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application / Appeal Out of Time Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether time should be enlarged to allow the applicants to file an appeal out of time.
- 2 Whether the delay was sufficiently explained to justify extension of time.
- 3 Whether the respondent’s non-opposition supported granting the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court exercised its discretion under Rule 4 and granted extension of time because the applicants explained the delay as arising from lack of legal representation and delay in obtaining proceedings, and the respondent did not oppose the application.
Court Disposition
Application allowed
Orders
- Time enlarged for the applicants to file their appeal out of time.
- Any appeal already filed is deemed properly filed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Dida alias Shulka & another v Republic (Criminal Application E012 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1646 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KECA 1646 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Court of Appeal at Nairobi Criminal Application E012 of 2026 PO Kiage, JA July 31, 2026 Between Halkhu Dida Alias Shulka 1st Applicant Bonaya Abkula 2nd Applicant and Republic Respondent (An appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Marsabit (Rayola, J.) dated 22nd January 2026 in Criminal Case No. E005 of 2024) Ruling 1.By the motion dated 1.4.26 brought under Rule 4 of the Rules of this Court, the applicants’ above-named pray, in the main, that time be enlarged for them to file their appeal out of time. The grounds on which the application is brought appear on its face. Most of those grounds are not relevant to an application for extension, of time but one of them does indicate that the delay in filing the appeal “was not intentional but was occasioned by lack of legal representation and delay in obtaining proceedings.” 2.The motion is supported by the affidavit of the 1st applicant, Halakhu Dida Alias Shulka who swears on his own behalf as well as on behalf of the second applicant Boyana Abkula, pursuant to an Authority to Plead given by the latter, to the former, dated 1.4 .26. The affidavit gives an account of the hardships the applicants have faced in the form of delay in obtaining legal representation and the proceedings of the court below. 3.The office of the Director of Public Prosecution has, vide a letter dated 30.6.26 signed by Ms. Proscovia Vitsengwa, given express indication that the Republic is not opposed to that application, among others. 4.That being the case, the motion be and is hereby granted. The appeal, if filed, is deemed to be properly filed. If not yet filed, I direct that the record of appeal be filed within thirty (30) days of today. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2026.P. O. KIAGE………….........…………… JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a true copy of the original.Signed DEPUTY REGISTRAR