[2024] KECA 1728 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant delayed almost six years in seeking to file a notice of appeal, and the explanation provided—that the delay was caused by the Court's failure to supply the judgment—was unsubstantiated. There was no evidence that the applicant made any effort to obtain the judgment or to indicate...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KECA 1728 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Wesley Kipngetich; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Application E175 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- MA Warsame
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Defilement Offence, Sentencing, Judicial Discretion
- 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
Wesley Kipngetich
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient reason for the inordinate delay in filing the notice of appeal.
- 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to extend time for filing the notice of appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant delayed almost six years in seeking to file a notice of appeal, and the explanation provided—that the delay was caused by the Court's failure to supply the judgment—was unsubstantiated. There was no evidence that the applicant made any effort to obtain the judgment or to indicate an intention to appeal within a reasonable time. The court held that the delay was inordinate and that the application was an afterthought. Consequently, the court declined to exercise its discretion to extend time, emphasizing that judicial discretion must be exercised judiciously and not in favour of applicants who fail to provide credible reasons for delay.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for extension of time to file a notice of appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Kipngetich v Republic (Criminal Application E175 of 2024) [2024] KECA 1728 (KLR) (4 December 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KECA 1728 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Court of Appeal at Nakuru
Criminal Application E175 of 2024
MA Warsame, JA
December 4, 2024
Between
Wesley Kipngetich
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
(An application for extension of time to file a notice of appeal, against the judgment of the High Court at Bomet (Muya, J.) dated 12h August 2018, in HCCRA No. 33 OF 2017)
Ruling
1. The applicant, was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for defilement contrary to Section 8(1) as read with Section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act in Criminal Case No. 70 of 2019 at Bomet. His appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed by the High Court on 12th August 2018.
2. The applicant failed to lodge a notice of appeal within the stipulated time and has filed the present application dated 23rd August 2024, seeking to enlarge the time to appeal. The applicant contends that he was not able to appeal on time because he was not supplied with the Court’s Judgment.
3. The court has settled on the matters which should be taken into consideration when the court was called upon to exercise its discretion. Those matters, as was stated in the case of Leo Sila Mutiso vs Helen Wangari, (NRB) Civil Application No. 251 of 1997, include:“… first, the length of the delay; secondly, the reason for the delay; thirdly (possibly), the chances of the appeal succeeding if the application is granted; and fourthly, the degree of prejudice to the respondent if the application is granted.”
4. In this case, the High Court rendered its judgment on 12th August 2018. The applicant filed this application almost 6 years out of time.
5. In my view this delay is inordinate and the explanation that the delay was occasioned by the Court is unsubstantiated. There is no indication whatsoever that the applicant intended to appeal. The appeal is simply an afterthought.
6. Consequently, I decline to exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant and dismiss the application.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU THIS 4THDAY OF DECEMBER 2024. M.WARSAME……………………….JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a True copy of the original.Signed Deputy Registrar