[2025] KEHC 6633 (KLR)
The court found that the petitioner had established a prima facie case for the grant of conservatory orders, as previously determined in the ruling of 25th February 2025. The respondents, despite being duly served, failed to participate in the proceedings or contest the petition. As a result, the averments and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 6633 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Vincent Kubasu Kaibe; Respondent: Director of Criminal Investigations; Respondent: OCS Bumala Police Station; Respondent: John Owino Wandera; Respondent: Jacinta Anyango Ochieng; Respondent: Owino Trezer Akinyi; Respondent: Gabriel Ouma Owino; Respondent: Shadrack Owino; Respondent: Gideon Owino; Respondent: The Director Of Public Prosecutions
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Busia
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Constitutional Petition E009 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- petition_allowed
- Judges
- WM Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Conservatory Orders, Right to Fair Hearing, Uncontested Petition
- 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
Vincent Kubasu Kaibe
Applicant
Director of Criminal Investigations
Respondent
OCS Bumala Police Station
Respondent
John Owino Wandera
Respondent
Jacinta Anyango Ochieng
Respondent
Owino Trezer Akinyi
Respondent
Gabriel Ouma Owino
Respondent
Shadrack Owino
Respondent
Gideon Owino
Respondent
The Director Of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioner is entitled to conservatory orders as sought in the petition.
- 2 Whether the respondents' failure to contest or respond to the petition entitles the petitioner to the reliefs sought.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the petitioner had established a prima facie case for the grant of conservatory orders, as previously determined in the ruling of 25th February 2025. The respondents, despite being duly served, failed to participate in the proceedings or contest the petition. As a result, the averments and claims made by the petitioner remained uncontroverted. In the absence of any contrary evidence or argument from the respondents, the court was satisfied that the petitioner was entitled to the reliefs sought in the petition. The court therefore granted the prayers in terms of prayers (a) and (b) of the petition dated 5th December 2025.
Court Disposition
petition_allowed
Orders
- Prayers (a) and (b) of the petition dated 5th December 2025 are granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
Kaibe v Director of Criminal Investigations & 8 others (Constitutional Petition E009 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 6633 (KLR) (23 May 2025) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 6633 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Busia
Constitutional Petition E009 of 2024
WM Musyoka, J
May 23, 2025
Between
Vincent Kubasu Kaibe
Petitioner
and
Director of Criminal Investigations
1st Respondent
OCS Bumala Police Station
2nd Respondent
John Owino Wandera
3rd Respondent
Jacinta Anyango Ochieng
4th Respondent
Owino Trezer Akinyi
5th Respondent
Gabriel Ouma Owino
6th Respondent
Shadrack Owino
7th Respondent
Gideon Owino
8th Respondent
The Director Of Public Prosecutions
9th Respondent
Judgment
1. On 25th February 2025, I delivered a ruling herein, on an application, dated 5th December 2024, which had sought conservatory orders, on the basis that, prima facie, there was material to justify grant of the order.
2. Thereafter I gave directions, for disposal of the petition by way of written submissions. The petitioner filed written submissions, dated 4th April 2025. I have read through them and noted the arguments made.
3. The respondents stayed away from the proceedings, despite service with the papers filed herein, as evidenced by the affidavits of service on record. The averments made by the petitioner, in his petition and verifying affidavits, were neither contested nor controverted. I considered the case presented by the petitioner in my ruling of 25th February 2025 and found it to be prima facie established. That was, of course, subject to a contrary case being presented by the respondents. No such case has been presented, and the case, as set out by the petitioner, holds.
4. There shall be no need to belabour the point, in view of what I have stated above. Consequently, I shall grant the prayers sought in the petition, dated, 5th December 2025, in terms of prayers (a) and (b) thereof. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED VIA EMAIL, AND DATED AND SIGNED IN CHAMBERS, AT BUSIA, ON THIS 23RD DAY OF MAY 2025. W. MUSYOKAJUDGEMr. Arthur Etyang, Court Assistant.AdvocatesMr. Muriithi, instructed by Ntoiti & Company, Advocates for the petitioner.