[2013] KEHC 2534 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 2534 (KLR)

The court found that although the applicants face serious charges, the law presumes them innocent until proven guilty. The applicants had previously been granted bond in other cases without allegations of absconding. The investigating officer's concerns regarding witness security were addressed by the passage of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 2534 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Henry Kamiti Chege; Applicant: Reuben Njuka Ngunyu; Applicant: Peter Wanjohi Chege; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal 76 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Review of Bond Denial
Outcome
Application for review of bond denial allowed; bond granted.
Judges
GO Shikwe
Legal Topics
Bail and Bond, Compelling Reasons, Pretrial Detention, Judicial Discretion
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Bail and Bond Compelling Reasons Pretrial Detention Judicial Discretion

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Henry Kamiti Chege

Applicant

Reuben Njuka Ngunyu

Applicant

Peter Wanjohi Chege

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Review of Bond Denial

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be granted bond pending trial despite the seriousness of the charges against them.
  2. 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny the applicants bond under Article 49(i)(h) of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the applicants face serious charges, the law presumes them innocent until proven guilty. The applicants had previously been granted bond in other cases without allegations of absconding. The investigating officer's concerns regarding witness security were addressed by the passage of nearly two months since the affidavit, which the court deemed sufficient time to make necessary arrangements. There was no compelling evidence presented to justify continued denial of bond. Therefore, the court exercised its discretion to review the earlier order and granted bond to the applicants, substituting the previous denial with an order for bond with surety.

Court Disposition

Application for review of bond denial allowed; bond granted.

Orders

  • The orders rejecting the application for bond dated 28th June, 2013 are reviewed and set aside.
  • Each applicant is admitted to a bond of Ksh. 3 million with one surety of similar amount.