https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/998

Makunda v Republic (Criminal Application E006 of 2026) [2026] KECA 998 (KLR) (22 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KECA 998 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Court of Appeal at Nakuru Criminal Application E006 of 2026 MB Kairaria, JA May 22, 2026 Between Justus Moi Makunda Applicant and Republic Respondent (An application for extension of time from the judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Naivasha (G. Nzioka J) delivered on 6th August 2025 in HC.CR.C NO. E037 0F 2024) Ruling 1.The applicant Justus Moi Makunda was convicted of the offence of defilement contrary to section 8[1] as read with section 8[2] of the Sexual offences Act No. 3 of 2006 and sentenced to life imprisonment in MCSO NO. E040 of 2023 at Naivasha Magistrates Court. Aggrieved by that judgement he unsuccessfully appealed to the High Court of Kenya Naivasha vide HCCRA NO. E037 of 2024 against both conviction and sentence. The High Court, G. Nzioka J dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence in a judgement dated 6th August 2025. 2.The applicant is dissatisfied by the decision of the High Court and desires to appeal to the Court of Appeal but is unable to do so directly because he did not lodge with the registrar of the High Court at Naivasha a notice in writing signalling his desire to appeal, within fourteen days after the date of that decision as required by Rule 61[1] of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022. 3.He has filed the Notice of Motion application dated 23rd February 2026 for extension of time to lodge his appeal. The application is supported by his undated affidavit where he explains that he did not file his appeal on time because he was not supplied with the High Court judgment. He filed written submissions dated 26th March 2026 in which he urges me to be guided by the decision of this Court [Warsame, JA) as he then was] in the case of Kariuki vs Republic NAK COA CR APPL. NO E060 of 2024 in which the learned judge cited the dicta in Andrew Kiplangat Chemaringo vs Paul Kipkorir Kibet [2018] eKLR and granted extension of time to appeal out of time after finding the reason given for the delay of three years and eight months plausible. The explanation for delay which the learned judge found satisfactory was that the applicant had relied on his relatives who promised to hire a lawyer to represent him but failed to do so due to financial constraints. 4.In the instant case, I find the reason given for the delay of 191 days is plausible and satisfactory. Consequently, I find merits in the application and allow it. I direct that the applicant shall file the notice of appeal within 14 days from today. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU THIS 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2026.MURUNGI B. KAIRARIA……………………………JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a True copy of the originalSignedDEPUTY REGISTRAR