[2023] KEHC 3013 (KLR)
The court found that although the application for leave to appeal was filed four months after the impugned acquittal order, the interests of justice favored granting the applicant an opportunity to be heard on the merits. The court emphasized that procedural errors, even by experienced parties, should not bar access...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 3013 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Director Of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: Paulo Muchuki & 5 others
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Application E068 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Leave to appeal out of time granted.
- Judges
- TW Cherere
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Acquittal Orders, Withdrawal of Charges, Judicial Discretion
- 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
Director Of Public Prosecutions
Applicant
Paulo Muchuki & 5 others
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to appeal out of time against the acquittal of the respondents under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the delay in filing the appeal has been sufficiently explained.
- 3 Whether granting leave to appeal would occasion prejudice to the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the application for leave to appeal was filed four months after the impugned acquittal order, the interests of justice favored granting the applicant an opportunity to be heard on the merits. The court emphasized that procedural errors, even by experienced parties, should not bar access to justice where no prejudice to the respondents is demonstrated. The court concluded that the respondents had not shown any prejudice that would result from the appeal being heard out of time. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to allow the application and granted leave to appeal out of time, subject to the applicant filing and serving the memorandum of appeal...
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Leave to appeal out of time granted.
Orders
- Applicant is granted leave to appeal out of time against the order issued on August 30, 2022 acquitting the 5 respondents under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The memorandum of appeal shall be filed and served within 14 days from the date of the ruling.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Director of Public Prosecutions v Muchuki & 5 others (Criminal Application E068 of 2022) [2023] KEHC 3013 (KLR) (30 March 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 3013 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Meru
Criminal Application E068 of 2022
TW Cherere, J
March 30, 2023
Between
Director Of Public Prosecutions
Applicant
and
Paulo Muchuki & 5 others
Respondent
Ruling
Background 1. On July 4, 2022, Respondents were arraigned in court joint charged with stock theft contrary to section 278 of the Penal Code and handling stolen stock contrary to section 322 (1) and (2) of the Penal Code Cap 63 Laws of Kenya.
2. On August 24, 2022, the hearing was adjourned on the ground that the prosecution had not diarized the case.
3. On August 30, 2022 the prosecution applied to withdraw the case under section 87 (a) of the Criminal Procedure Code on the ground that there was no witness in court.
4. The record shows that the learned trial magistrate dismissed the application for withdrawal and acquitted the 5 respondents under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
5. Applicant seeks leave to appeal the acquittal on the ground that it is dissatisfied with the order and was unable to get proceedings in good time to appeal.
6. Mr. Kaberia opposed the application on the application on the ground that the delay in filing the appeal has not been explained.
7. Both the refusal to withdraw the suit and to acquit Respondents are matter of the court’s discretionary power that must be exercised judiciously.
8. Whereas it is indeed correct that this application was filed on December 20, 2022 which is four months after the impugned order, it should be the court’s last resort to deny a party a chance to be heard on merit.
9. In any case, the door of justice is not closed because a mistake has been made by a person of experience who ought to have known better as the Applicant in this case ought to have known.
10. It has not been demonstrated that the appeal will occasion the Respondents any prejudice. Consequently, I find that the interest of justice is in favour of granting the Applicant leave to appeal out of time.
11. In the end, the application dated December 20, 2022 is allowed in the following terms:i.Applicant is granted leave to appeal out of time, the order issued on August 30, 2022 acquitting the 5 respondents under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Codeii.The memorandum of appeal shall be filed and served within 14 days from today’s dateiii.Mention on April 26, 2023 to confirm compliance and for further orders
DATED IN MERU THIS 30th DAY OF March 2023T.W. CHEREREJUDGEAppearancesCourt Assistant - Morris KinotiFor Applicant - Ms. Rita (PPC)For Respondent - Mr. Kaberia for Kaibunga Kaberia & Co. Advocates