[2021] KEHC 2075 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had not presented any new or compelling circumstances that had not already been considered by Hon. Justice Ngenye in the previous application for revision of bond terms. The grounds advanced, including the applicant's inability to raise surety, the complainant's intention to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 2075 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Frank Ochola Oguna; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E208 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Second Application for Revision of Bond Terms
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Bail and Bond Terms, Review of Court Orders
- 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
Frank Ochola Oguna
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Second Application for Revision of Bond Terms
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has presented new grounds to warrant further revision of bond terms previously revised by the court.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an alternative of cash bail in lieu of surety.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had not presented any new or compelling circumstances that had not already been considered by Hon. Justice Ngenye in the previous application for revision of bond terms. The grounds advanced, including the applicant's inability to raise surety, the complainant's intention to withdraw, and the applicant's family circumstances, were all previously addressed and formed the basis of the earlier revision. The court held that there was no justifiable reason to revisit or further revise the bond terms set by the previous order, and that the principle of finality in interlocutory matters precluded the re-litigation of issues already determined. Accordingly, the...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for further revision of bond terms is dismissed wholly.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATIONE208 OF 2021
FRANK OCHOLA OGUNA......................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC.............................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
This matter is now before the court for the application of the applicant, FRANK OCHOLA OGUNA, filed herein on 17. 5.2021. The application seeks that this court reviews the terms of bond as already reviewed by the court and to give the applicant an alternative of cash bail. It is supported by the affidavit of the applicant in which it is deponed that the applicant, charged with the offence of robbery with violence contrary section 296(2), and was granted a bond of Ksh.1,000,000/= with 1 surety of a similar amount. That on applying for revision of the terms the Honourable Justice Ngenye revised the same to a sum of Kshs.500,000/= with 1 surety of a similar amount.
This application is therefore the 2nd application for revision the terms. It has been submitted by the applicant that the applicant has been unable to raise the surety and now prays for an alternative of cash bail. That there are also intentions of the complainant to withdraw this case.
The prosecution opposed this application on the grounds that there are no new circumstances that could make this court revise the orders of the Hon. Justice Ngenye who otherwise considered the similar submissions before making the ordered of revision. The court was urged to dismiss this application.
I have considered the application of the applicant and the submissions of the 2 sides. This application seeks that this court reviews further the orders of revision of the Hon. Lady Justice G. Ngenye issued on 28. 11. 2019. I have had the benefit of perusing the ruling of the Honourable Judge. It is clear that in the said application, the honourable Judge dealt with the following grounds;
- That mother of the applicant had an accident and could not feed herself.
- That the complainant intends to withdraw the case.
- That the bond was too high and the applicant could not afford the same.
The Honourable Judge duly considered the issues raised and duly revised the ordered of the trial court as shown above. The issue therefore that comes to mind is whether in this present application, the applicant has raised any new issue that would persuade this court to revise the orders of 28. 11. 2019. With respect to the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, all the issues raised in this application were materially and substantively considered by the Hon. Justice Ngenye in the ruling of 28. 11. 2019. There is therefore no justifiable reason for this court to revisit the same issues. I find no merit in the application of the applicant filed herein on 17. 5.2021. I dismiss the same wholly. Orders accordingly.
D. O. OGEMBO
JUDGE
16. 11. 2021.
Court:
Ruling read out in open court in the presence of the application (Nairobi Remand), Mr. Omwenga and Ms. Joy for the state/respondent
D. O. OGEMBO
JUDGE
16. 11. 2021.