https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/7503
The court found that the applicants had been denied a fair opportunity to present their defence, that the prosecution would suffer no irremediable prejudice, and that the interests of justice required setting aside the order closing the defence case and remitting the matter for defence hearing.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 7503 (KLR)
- Parties
- 1st Applicant: Jonathan Kimondio; 2nd Applicant: Nicholas Musyoki; 3rd Applicant: Stephen Muli; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E029 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Review/application Against Order Closing Defence Case After Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Application allowed
- Judges
- ["DR Kavedza"]
- Legal Topics
- Revision of Trial Court Orders, Right to Fair Trial, Right to Adduce and Challenge Evidence, Adjournment and Defence Hearing, Setting Aside Closure of Defence Case
- 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 Kimondio
1st Applicant
Nicholas Musyoki
2nd Applicant
Stephen Muli
3rd Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Review/application Against Order Closing Defence Case After Prosecution Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court's order closing the defence case should be reviewed and set aside
- 2 Whether the applicants were denied a fair trial by being prevented from presenting their defence and calling witnesses
- 3 Whether the interests of justice warranted remitting the matter to the trial court for defence hearing
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants had been denied a fair opportunity to present their defence, that the prosecution would suffer no irremediable prejudice, and that the interests of justice required setting aside the order closing the defence case and remitting the matter for defence hearing.
Court Disposition
Application allowed
Orders
- The order made on 12th March 2026 closing the defence case is set aside.
- The applicants are at liberty to present their defence and call such witnesses as may be necessary, subject to the directions of the trial court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KIBERA** **CRIMINAL REVISION NO. E029 OF 2026** JONATHAN KIMONDIO……………………………………1ST APPLICANT NICHOLAS MUSYOKI………………………………………..2ND APPLICANT STEPHEN MULI……………………………………………….3RD APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC………………………………………………………….RESPONDENT **RULING.** 1. The applicants seek review and setting aside of the order made on 12th March 2026 in Kibera Chief Magistrate’s Criminal Case No. 1300 of 2018, which closed the defence case after the prosecution had concluded its case. They contend that, although they had indicated their intention to testify and call witnesses, the defence hearing was repeatedly adjourned due to circumstances beyond their control. 2. They further assert that the trial court closed the defence case without affording them an opportunity to present evidence or call witnesses, despite the absence of material police files and witness statements. The applicants argue that the refusal to grant an adjournment for adequate preparation and legal representation, coupled with the closure of the defence case, denied them a fair opportunity to present their defence, resulting in procedural unfairness, a miscarriage of justice, and a violation of their right to a fair trial under Article 50 of the Constitution. 3. Interim orders were issued by this court 19th March 2026 and directions were issued for the hearing of the application. 4. The respondent did not oppose the application. 5. Having considered the application, the supporting affidavit, and the material placed before the Court, I am satisfied that the orders sought are merited. The right of an accused person to adduce and challenge evidence forms a fundamental component of the right to a fair trial under Article 50 of the Constitution. 6. In the circumstances of this case, and bearing in mind that the Respondent has not opposed the application, I find that it is in the interests of justice that the Applicants be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present their defence. No prejudice will be occasioned to the prosecution that cannot be addressed by the trial court through appropriate case management directions. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The order made on 12th March 2026 closing the defence case is hereby set aside. The Applicants shall be at liberty to present their defence and call such witnesses as may be necessary, subject to the directions of the trial court. 8. The matter is remitted back to the trial court for directions at Kibera on 17th June 2026 on defence hearing and/or such further orders as the court may deem fit for the expeditious disposal of the matter. Orders accordingly. **Ruling dated and delivered virtually this 3rd day of June 2026** **\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_** **D. KAVEDZA** **JUDGE** **In the presence of:** Wambua for the Applicant Mutuma for the Respondent Karimi Court Assistant.