[2017] KEHC 6015 (KLR)
The court found that the orders sought by the petitioners, including the quashing of criminal proceedings and declarations of constitutional violations, could only be properly considered after a full hearing of evidence from both parties. The court held that the Constitution and relevant laws provide sufficient...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 6015 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Jedidah Wanja Mathara; Applicant: Angela Kananu; Applicant: Agnes Karimi; Applicant: Rose Makandi; Applicant: Japhet Kirema; Applicant: Judy Mwenda; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General; Respondent: The Inspector General of Police; Respondent: The O.C.S Marsabit; Respondent: The S.R.M Marsabit; Respondent: The Dir. of Public Prosecutions
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Marsabit
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Constitutional Petition 2 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- petition dismissed with costs to respondents
- Legal Topics
- Fundamental Rights Enforcement, Quashing Criminal Proceedings, Seizure of Property, Right to Fair Trial
- 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
Jedidah Wanja Mathara
Applicant
Angela Kananu
Applicant
Agnes Karimi
Applicant
Rose Makandi
Applicant
Japhet Kirema
Applicant
Judy Mwenda
Applicant
The Hon. Attorney General
Respondent
The Inspector General of Police
Respondent
The O.C.S Marsabit
Respondent
The S.R.M Marsabit
Respondent
The Dir. of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the seizure and confiscation of the 1st petitioner's Alcoholic Drinks License without a warrant violated her constitutional rights.
- 2 Whether the ongoing criminal proceedings against the petitioners should be quashed by the High Court at the interlocutory stage.
- 3 Whether the petitioners are entitled to damages for alleged violations of fundamental rights.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the orders sought by the petitioners, including the quashing of criminal proceedings and declarations of constitutional violations, could only be properly considered after a full hearing of evidence from both parties. The court held that the Constitution and relevant laws provide sufficient safeguards to prevent prejudice in criminal proceedings, and that granting the orders at this interlocutory stage would undermine the mandates of other organs and be based on insufficient evidence. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed with costs to the respondents, and the pending criminal trials were ordered to proceed expeditiously.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed with costs to respondents
Orders
- The petition is dismissed with costs to the respondents.
- The pending criminal trials shall proceed and where possible on a day to day basis.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MARSABIT
CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION NO.2 OF 2016
1. JEDIDAH WANJA MATHARA
2. ANGELA KANANU
3. AGNES KARIMI
4. ROSE MAKANDI
5. JAPHET KIREMA
6. JUDY MWENDA ............................................... PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL
2. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
3. THE O.C.S MARSABIT
4. THE S.R.M MARSABIT
5. THE DIR. OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS......... RESPONDENT
RULING
The petition by the petitioners is brought by way of notice of motion dated 14th October 2016 pursuant to Articles 10,19,20,21(2),22,23, 28, 29,47,50,157 and 165(3) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010. The petitioners are seeking orders as follows:-
1. an order directed to the 4th respondent by himself, his servants and /or agent or any other judicial officer for the time being seized to bring to the court for the purpose of being quashed the proceedings in Marsabit SRM's criminal cases Nos.130, 131, 132, and 554 of 2016 against 2nd,3rd, 4th,5th and 6th petitioners respectively.
2. A declaration that the seizure and confiscation of the 1st petitioner's Alcoholic Drinks License by the 2nd and 3rd respondents police officers without warrants or by any court orders rendering the 1st petitioner unable to carry out her businesses within the terms of her license and to earn a livelihood are violations of 1st petitioner's fundamental rights to life, to the protection and benefit of the law, human dignity and privacy guaranteed by the constitution.
3. An order for general, exemplary/vindicatory and/or punitive damages against the respondents consequential to declarations of violations of the fundamental rights and freedoms of the petitioner in prayers (1) to (3).
4. Costs be provided for.
The respondents have contended that they were discharging their mandate within the law.
I have perused the affidavits by both parties and the submissions by their respective counsel. The application is seeking for orders that can only be granted after hearing of evidence from both parties.
What the petitioners put forth in support of the petition can be adequately examined during the hearing of the criminal matters that are pending.
The constitution and the other relevant laws have put in place sufficient safeguards to ensure that nobody is prejudiced by institution of criminal proceedings.
In granting any of the orders sought by the petitioners, I will be rendering the other organs ineffective in their mandates. I will also be granting the said orders on the basis of very scanty evidence at my disposal.
The petition must fail with costs to the respondents.
The pending trials shall proceed and where possible on a day to day basis.
Orders accordingly.
DATED at MARSABIT this 19th Day of April 2017
KIARIE WAWERU KIARIE
JUDGE.