[2018] KEHC 8642 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 8642 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the delay—reliance on relatives to hire an advocate—was not credible or plausible, especially given the nearly two-year lapse before filing the application. The court further noted that the applicant may have been satisfied with the decisions of the lower courts,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 8642 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: J K N; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application 2 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
A Mabeya
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals, Incest Offence, Sentencing, Conviction Challenge
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Extension of Time Appeals Incest Offence Sentencing Conviction Challenge

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J K N

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient and credible reasons for the inordinate delay in filing an appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal out of time should be granted in light of the circumstances and reasons advanced.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the delay—reliance on relatives to hire an advocate—was not credible or plausible, especially given the nearly two-year lapse before filing the application. The court further noted that the applicant may have been satisfied with the decisions of the lower courts, which could explain the lack of urgency in pursuing an appeal. The inordinate and unexplained delay, coupled with unconvincing reasons, did not warrant the exercise of the court's discretion to grant leave to appeal out of time. Accordingly, the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal out of time is denied.