https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/7503

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
Criminal Procedure Constitutional Law 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-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

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

  1. 1 Whether the trial court's order closing the defence case should be reviewed and set aside
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were denied a fair trial by being prevented from presenting their defence and calling witnesses
  3. 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.