[2013] KEHC 2372 (KLR)
The court found that the explanation given by the accused for their failure to attend court was unsatisfactory. The accused and their counsel had a duty to ensure they attended the correct courtroom or sought directions if in doubt. The court held that there was no sufficient cause to warrant the exercise of its...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 2372 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: John Koech & 6 Others; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 6 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Application for Revision of Bond Terms and Forfeiture Order
- Outcome
- application for revision declined
- Judges
- RPV Wendoh
- Legal Topics
- Bail and Bond, Forfeiture of Bail, Revisionary Jurisdiction
- 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
John Koech & 6 Others
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Application for Revision of Bond Terms and Forfeiture Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the explanation given by the accused for non-attendance in court was satisfactory.
- 2 Whether the forfeiture of cash bail and maintenance of bond terms was justified.
- 3 Whether the court should exercise its revisionary powers to vary the bond terms.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the explanation given by the accused for their failure to attend court was unsatisfactory. The accused and their counsel had a duty to ensure they attended the correct courtroom or sought directions if in doubt. The court held that there was no sufficient cause to warrant the exercise of its revisionary powers to vary the bond terms or set aside the forfeiture of cash bail. The bond terms of Kshs.5,000/- were deemed fair and appropriate in the circumstances, given the accused's lack of responsibility in attending court. Consequently, the application for revision was declined and the orders of the lower court were upheld.
Court Disposition
application for revision declined
Orders
- Order of revision is declined.
- Bond terms of Kshs.5,000/- to remain in force.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
REVISION NO. 6 OF 2013
JOHN KOECH & 6 OTHERS………………….…….APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC………………………………………….RESPONDENT
REVISION
This file was placed before me for purposes of the exercising revisionary powers pursuant to Section 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
On 30/5/2013, Hon. Nthuku, Senior Resident Magistrate forfeited the cash bail that had been given to the accused persons for reason that they had failed to appear in court since December 2012. The court had issued a warrant of arrest for the accused and the police had claimed that they were unable to trace the accused persons. On 30/5/2013, the accused persons appeared before the Hon. Magistrate at 1. 10 p.m. in company of counsel, Miss Njeri who sought the lifting of the warrants of arrest for reasons that the accused have been coming to court but going to Court 1 since December 2012. The court did not accept the explanation given on behalf of the accused person for reasons that counsel should have advised them which court to go to or they would have asked for directions.
The accused persons appeared in court for plea on 16/11/2012 and were given bond of Kshs.50,000/- and cash bail of Kshs.20,000/-. The file was placed before me to revise the bond terms downwards which I did by giving the accused persons cash bail of Kshs.5,000/-. They paid the cash bail and from that day, they never attended court following which warrants of arrest were issued. I do agree with the Hon. Magistrate that the explanation given by the accused was not satisfactory. If indeed they had come to court, they would have asked for directions or their counsel would have directed them where to go. There is no good reason why this court should excise its discretion and vary the bond terms given to the accused. An order of review is not deserved. The bond terms of kshs.5,000/- are fair in the circumstances because the accused are not responsible enough to come to court by themselves. It seems they will need somebody to over see it and that will be done by the surety. Order of revision is declined.
R.P.V. WENDOH
JUDGE
11/6/2013