[2023] KEHC 18955 (KLR)
The court held that although anticipatory bail is not specifically provided for under the Constitution, the right to liberty is protected, and the court has discretion to grant anticipatory bail where there is a credible threat to a person's liberty. Upon reviewing the applicant's affidavit and supporting documents,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 18955 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Bhavik Chandrakant Dodhia; Respondent: Inspector General of Police
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E232 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Anticipatory Bail Application
- Outcome
- Application for anticipatory bail granted; applicant admitted to anticipatory bail and respondent restrained from arresting or detaining applicant pending hearing.
- Judges
- DR Kavedza
- Legal Topics
- Anticipatory Bail, Constitutional Rights, Arrest and Detention, Bail Conditions
- 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
Bhavik Chandrakant Dodhia
Applicant
Inspector General of Police
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Anticipatory Bail Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail pending investigations or possible charges relating to the rice transaction between Brandshut Kenya Limited and JPN Trading Limited.
- 2 Whether the respondent should be restrained from arresting, charging, or prosecuting the applicant in relation to the said transaction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that although anticipatory bail is not specifically provided for under the Constitution, the right to liberty is protected, and the court has discretion to grant anticipatory bail where there is a credible threat to a person's liberty. Upon reviewing the applicant's affidavit and supporting documents, the court was satisfied that the application was merited. The court therefore admitted the applicant to anticipatory bail of Kshs. 500,000 and issued orders restraining the respondent from arresting or detaining the applicant pending the hearing of the application, subject to the applicant's cooperation with investigators and compliance with further directions.
Court Disposition
Application for anticipatory bail granted; applicant admitted to anticipatory bail and respondent restrained from arresting or detaining applicant pending hearing.
Orders
- The application is certified as urgent.
- The applicant is admitted to anticipatory bail of Kshs. 500,000.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Dodhia v Inspector General of Police (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E232 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 18955 (KLR) (Crim) (26 June 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 18955 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Criminal
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E232 of 2023
DR Kavedza, J
June 26, 2023
Between
Bhavik Chandrakant Dodhia
Applicant
and
Inspector General of Police
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant has filed a Notice of Motion Application dated June 23, 2023 under articles 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 28 & 29 of the Constitution and section 123(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, cap 75 Laws of Kenya. The application is filed under certificate of urgency supported by an affidavit of even date, sworn by the applicant. The applicant has sought a conservatory order restraining the respondents and officers under him from arresting, charging and or prosecuting him in respect of any matter relating to the purchase and supply of the rice transaction between Brandshut Kenya Limited and JPN Trading Limited or any other related matter. The applicant has further sought to be admitted to anticipatory bail pending investigations and/or charge by the respondent.
2. Although the applicant has listed various articles of the Constitution, none of them specifically refer to anticipatory orders.
3. I do note that anticipatory bail is not specifically provided for under the Constitution. However, the Constitution mandates the government to protect and respect the rights of all Kenyans, this includes the right to liberty.
4. Having gone through the affidavit of the applicant and the annexures, I am satisfied that the application is merited and issue the following orders:a)That the application is certified as urgent.b)That the applicant is admitted to anticipatory bail of Kshs.500,000/=.c)That the respondents, either by themselves, their servants and or agents are prohibited from arresting or detaining the applicant pending hearing of this application.d)That the applicant’s advocates are directed to escort the applicant to the offices of the respondent for questioning and or interview on June 28, 2023. e)That the applicant shall cooperate with the investigators during the period of investigations.f)That should a decision to charge the applicant be made, the applicant and his advocates shall be informed to report to the relevant police station for processing.g)That the applicant shall be informed in advance the court he is to appear for plea.h)That the orders of this court shall lapse if a decision to charge the applicant is made.i)That this order and the application to be served upon the respondents within 3 days.j)That upon service, the respondent shall have ten (10) days to file their response.k)That this matter shall be mentioned on 19/7/2023 for directions.
RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY ON 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023. ......................................D. KAVEDZAJUDGE