[2003] KEHC 284 (KLR)
The court held that the grant of bail pending appeal is discretionary and hinges on whether the applicant has demonstrated overwhelming chances of success in the appeal. Upon reviewing the lower court proceedings, the judge found that the first applicant, Idris Yusuf Bwana, met this threshold and was entitled to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2003] KEHC 284 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Idris Yusuf Bwana; Appellant: Mohammed Ghani Taib; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 585 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Application / Application for Bail Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for bail pending appeal allowed for the first applicant and dismissed for the second applicant.
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Appeal, Appellate Procedure, Health Grounds, Bond 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
Idris Yusuf Bwana
Appellant
Mohammed Ghani Taib
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application / Application for Bail Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated overwhelming chances of success in their appeals to warrant bail pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the health condition of the second applicant justifies the grant of bail pending appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the grant of bail pending appeal is discretionary and hinges on whether the applicant has demonstrated overwhelming chances of success in the appeal. Upon reviewing the lower court proceedings, the judge found that the first applicant, Idris Yusuf Bwana, met this threshold and was entitled to bail pending appeal. However, the second applicant, Mohammed Ghani Taib, did not satisfy the court that his appeal had overwhelming chances of success, and his health condition alone was insufficient to warrant bail. Consequently, only the first applicant was admitted to bail, subject to stringent bond terms.
Court Disposition
Application for bail pending appeal allowed for the first applicant and dismissed for the second applicant.
Orders
- The first applicant, Idris Yusuf Bwana, is admitted to bail pending appeal on his own bond of KES 5,000,000 with one surety of like amount.
- Failure to provide the surety will result in continued incarceration.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.585 OF 2002
IDRIS YUSUF BWANA ) MOHAMMED GHANI TAIB....................................Appellant
Versus
REPUBLIC..................................................................................................Respondent
The two applicants brought this application seeking bail pending appeal. The 1st applicant (Idris Yusuf Bwana) the main affidavit in support of his application file on 12th June 2002. He also put in written submissions to support his appeal.
The second applicant (Mohammed Ghani Taib) also put in an application for bail pending appeal supported by his affidavit dated 9th September 2002. He has relied on the grounds that he is ailing, weak, frail and an unstable state of health. I have studied the applicant’s written submissions in support of their application for bail pending appeal.
I have noted that Mr. Monda for the state opposed the application vehemently and argued that the appellants appeals do not have any chances of success. While considering an application for bail pending appeal the court must be guided by the question of whether or not the applicant had demonstrated to the court that his or her appeal has overwhelming chances of success. In order to come to this kind of conclusion there is need for the Judge to study the proceedings and the Judgment of the lower Court.
I have carefully studied the proceedings of the lower Court in Nairobi Chief Magistrate Criminal Case No.1154/2000 in so far as such proceedings touch on the case against the two applicants.
Without preempting the success or otherwise of the pending appeal, it is my considered view that the application by the 2nd applicant herein Mohammed Ghani Taib should not succeed. As concerns the 1st applicant herein it is my considered view that he is entitled to bail pending appeal as prayed. I therefore admit the 1st applicant Mr. Idris Yusuf Bwana to bail pending his pending appeal.
I order that the applicant will be released on his own bond of five million Kenya shillings together with one surety of the like amount.
Failure to raise such a surety will lead to the applicant continuing to serve the current jail entence. Upon release on bond the applicant will be attending mentions of his pending appeal before Deputy Registrar (Criminal Division) as he wants to present his appeal.
Mentions will be after every 30 days. Order accordingly.
R.M. MUTITU
JUDGE
13/1/2002
Delivered, dated and signed in open Court in the presence of Mr. Wandungi for the applicants and in the presence of Miss Nyamosi for the respondents.
R.M. MUTITU
JUDGE
13/1/2002
Order:
Hearing of the appeal be done on priority basis.
R.M. MUTITU
JUDGE
13/1/2003