https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1452

Shiande v Republic (Criminal Application E042 of 2024) [2026] KECA 1452 (KLR) (17 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KECA 1452 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Court of Appeal at Eldoret Criminal Application E042 of 2024 MN Nduma, JA July 17, 2026 Between Fredrick Shiande Applicant and Republic Respondent (Being an application for extension of time to file an Appeal out of time from the decision of the High Court of Kenya at Eldoret (R. Nyakundi, J.) delivered on 11th April, 2024 in HCCRA No. E014 of 2020 Criminal Appeal E014 of 2020 ) Ruling 1.Fredrick Shiande, the applicant was convicted for the offence of defilement contrary to section 8(1) as read with 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act. He subsequently appealed in Eldoret HCCRA No. E014 of 2020 where the appeal on conviction was dismissed and the life sentence was substituted with a 30-year sentence on 11th April 2024. Aggrieved, he intends to file a second appeal to this Court hence the present application. 2.The application seeking extension of time is dated 26th June 2024 about two months and 15 days from the date of the decision by the High Court on reduction of sentence. It is supported by his affidavit of even date and written submissions dated 8th July 2026 which further buttresses the grounds raised. 3.The application came up for hearing on 9th July 2026 and was dispensed with by way of written submissions. 4.The applicant submitted that he intended to appeal and his family had promised to engage an Advocate on his behalf. However, he later learnt that they did not succeed due to financial constraints and by then, the statutory period of 14 days had lapsed. He contends that the delay was not deliberate or inordinate, the appeal is arguable and the Respondent would not be prejudiced. The application is not opposed by the Respondent. Mr. Okaka, Principal Prosecution Counsel, through his written submissions dated 8th July 2026 submitted that the delay was not inordinate. He urged the Court to exercise its discretion and grant the same citing the case of Andrew Kiplagat Chemaringo v Kipkorir Kibet (2018) eKLR in which it was held that: -“The law does not set any minimum or maximum period of delay. All it states is that the delay should be satisfactorily explained.’’ 5.Having considered the parties submissions and the well stated principles for extension of time, I find that the delay of approximately two and a half months is not inordinate. Similarly, the reasons advanced by the applicant for the failure to lodge the appeal within the stipulated time are excusable. Accordingly, in light of the discretion conferred by Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules, I am persuaded that the application has merit. The application is hereby allowed as prayed. The applicant is granted leave to file his appeal within the prescribed period from the date of this ruling. DATED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026.NDUMA NDERI………………………………JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a true copy of the original.SignedDEPUTY REGISTRAR