[1990] KEHC 67 (KLR)
The court held that the magistrate was entitled to consider the circumstances surrounding the charges, including the allegation of attempted bribery, in determining whether to grant bail. The likelihood of interference with investigations was a significant factor, and the applicant's not guilty plea did not outweigh...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1990] KEHC 67 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Jonathan Mungai Wainaina; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application 9 of 1990
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Application for Bail Pending Trial
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Judicial Discretion, Interference With Investigations
- 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
Jonathan Mungai Wainaina
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Application for Bail Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be granted bail pending trial in light of the circumstances of the charges against him.
- 2 Whether the likelihood of interference with investigations justifies denial of bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the magistrate was entitled to consider the circumstances surrounding the charges, including the allegation of attempted bribery, in determining whether to grant bail. The likelihood of interference with investigations was a significant factor, and the applicant's not guilty plea did not outweigh the risk posed. The court found no reason to overturn the magistrate's decision and dismissed the application for bail, emphasizing that the trial could be expedited if necessary.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for bail pending trial is refused and dismissed.
- The applicant and prosecution may mention the case before the trial magistrate to seek earlier hearing dates.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISUMU
MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO 9 OF 1990
JONATHAN MUNGAI WAINAINA ……………………..APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC………………..……………..........……….RESPONDENT
RULING
The applicant Jonathan Mungai Wainaina applies to me by chamber summons under section 123(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code for bail pending his trial. He is charged with various offences in the Court of the Resident Magistrate at Kisumu and those offences would appear to arise from the circumstances surrounding the death of the Kenya’s late Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Corporation. It is alleged in various charges against the applicant that in effect he took or attempted to take advantage of the circumstances of that death to make personal pecuniary gains for himself. Those allegations are of course no more than allegations at this stage because the applicant has pleaded not guilty to all the charges, but I think that the magistrate was entitled to take into account the circumstances out of which the charges arose and weigh them in whether or not the applicant should be granted bail. She did so and refused the applicant bail and looking at the whole of the circumstances myself, I think the magistrate was right. It is even alleged against the applicant in one of the charges that he attempted to bribe a police officer and that attempted bribery would appear to have arisen from the circumstances of the other charges. That would lend weight to the prosecution’s contention that the applicant is likely to interfere with the investigations. Mr Aluoch for the applicant has not gone so far as to say before me that bail must be granted in all circumstances. I am informed by the trial magistrate that the case of the applicant can be heard much earlier than the dates already given to it in July.
I refuse this application and order it dismissed and if Mr Aluoch for the applicant is so inclined, he and the prosecution can have the case mentioned before the trial magistrate with a view to getting earlier hearing dates for it.
Dated and Delivered this 30th Day of March, 1990
R.S.C. OMOLO
………….
JUDGE