[2016] KEHC 507 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 507 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants failed to provide any credible or documented explanation for the inordinate delay of 14 years in seeking leave to appeal out of time. The applicants did not annex any evidence of having attempted to file their appeals or reminders to the Court of Appeal. The court held that the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEHC 507 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: James Muriithi Marete; Applicant: Jamlick Njeru Ireri; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Embu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Revision 27 & 28 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
FN Muchemi
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Inordinate Delay, Criminal Appeals, Procedural Timelines
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Out of Time Inordinate Delay Criminal Appeals Procedural Timelines

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Muriithi Marete

Applicant

Jamlick Njeru Ireri

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have provided sufficient cause for the inordinate delay of 14 years in seeking leave to appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of supporting documents undermines the credibility of the applicants' claims to have attempted to file appeals within time.
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion under Section 349 of the Criminal Procedure Code to admit the appeal out of time.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to provide any credible or documented explanation for the inordinate delay of 14 years in seeking leave to appeal out of time. The applicants did not annex any evidence of having attempted to file their appeals or reminders to the Court of Appeal. The court held that the delay was unreasonable and not within the contemplation of Section 349 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which allows for extension of time only for good cause and within a reasonable period. The court concluded that the applications were an afterthought and that granting leave would not serve the interests of justice, as it would prejudice the prosecution and undermine the...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The applications for leave to appeal out of time are dismissed.