[2010] KEHC 1859 (KLR)
The court found that the application for bail pending appeal was merited because the trial magistrate failed to call the appellants to plead to their offence, a significant procedural irregularity. The state conceded that this oversight was material. Applying the principles from Dominic Karanja v. Republic, the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 1859 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Juliana Kinanu Murithi; Appellant: Jane Nkirote; Appellant: Mary Ntui; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 108, 107 & 109 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Bail Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- bail pending appeal granted
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Appeal, Grievous Harm, Conviction Appeal, Personal Bond, Surety Requirements
- 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
Juliana Kinanu Murithi
Appellant
Jane Nkirote
Appellant
Mary Ntui
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Bail Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellants are entitled to bail pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the appeal has overwhelming chances of success justifying release on bail.
- 3 Whether there were procedural irregularities in the trial warranting bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application for bail pending appeal was merited because the trial magistrate failed to call the appellants to plead to their offence, a significant procedural irregularity. The state conceded that this oversight was material. Applying the principles from Dominic Karanja v. Republic, the court held that where an appeal has overwhelming chances of success, or where there are exceptional or unusual circumstances, bail pending appeal should be granted. The appellants had also demonstrated good conduct by attending court as required during the trial. Consequently, the court ordered the release of each appellant on their own personal bond with a surety, pending the...
Court Disposition
bail pending appeal granted
Orders
- Each appellant to be released from custody pending appeal on their own personal bond of Kshs. 40,000 and one surety of similar amount.
- The matter to be mentioned before court on 29th November 2010.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU Criminal Appeal 108, 107 & 109 of 2010
JULIANA KINANU MURITHI ..................... 1ST APPELLANT
JANE NKIROTE ....................................... 2ND APPELLANT
MARY NTUI ............................................. 3RD APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC ................................................... RESPONDENT
CONSOLIDATED WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL CASE NO. 107 OF 2010
MARY NTUI ................................................... APPELLANT
CONSOLIDATED WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL CASE NO. 109 OF 2010
JANE NKIROTE ............................................. APPELLANT
RULING
The appellants were all convicted of causing grievous harm contrary to section 234 of the penal Code.On being convicted, they were all sentenced to 4 years imprisonment.They have all filed an application for bail pending appeal dated 8th June 2010. It was argued most vigorously by counsel for the appellants that the appellant’s appeal has high chances of success.It was also submitted that the appellants were on bond as they attended the lower court matter and that they did not fail to attend court when required.The learned counsel for the appellants went into great details in arguing the application some of which touched on the very appeal which does not fall for consideration at this point.For that reason, I will not consider in details the arguments raised by that counsel.Suffice to say, that the learned state counsel conceded to the application stating that the trial magistrate overlooked a very important aspect of the trial.He pointed out that the appellants were not called to plead to their offence.The principles for granting bail pending appeal were set out in the case Dominic Karanja Vs. Republic[1986] KLR.The Court of Appeal stated thus:-
“The most important issue was that if the appeal had such overwhelming chances of success, there was no justification for depriving the applicant of his liberty and the minor relevant considerations would be whetherthere were exceptional or unusual circumstances.”
I have considered the submissions made before me and I have also considered the proceedings and the judgment of the lower court.I find that the application for bail pending appeal is merited.I therefore order that each appellant be released from custody pending appeal on their own personal bond of Kshs. 40,000/= and each appellant to provide one surety of similar amount.I order that this matter be mentioned before court on 29th November 2010.
Dated and delivered at Meru this 18th day of June 2010.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE