[2024] KEHC 6130 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 6130 (KLR)

The court found that there had been no activity on the file since March 16, 2022, and neither party nor their counsel appeared or provided any explanation for the failure to prosecute the matter. In accordance with Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 6130 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Alphose Muteti Kisyula; Applicant: Joshua Muteti Kilonzo; Applicant: Benerd Masinga Maluki; Respondent: Chief Magistrate Court, Kiambu; Respondent: Hon Attorney General Of Kenya; Respondent: Director Of Public Prosecution; Respondent: National Police Service; Respondent: Director of Criminal Investigation Office; Interested Party: Serah Nzembi Nzyka; Interested Party: Benerd Masinga Maluki
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kiambu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review E005 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal
Outcome
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Judges
DO Chepkwony
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Order 17 Rule 2, Judicial Review Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Order 17 Rule 2 Judicial Review Procedure

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alphose Muteti Kisyula

Applicant

Joshua Muteti Kilonzo

Applicant

Benerd Masinga Maluki

Applicant

Chief Magistrate Court, Kiambu

Respondent

Hon Attorney General Of Kenya

Respondent

Director Of Public Prosecution

Respondent

National Police Service

Respondent

Director of Criminal Investigation Office

Respondent

Serah Nzembi Nzyka

Interested Party

Benerd Masinga Maluki

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there had been no activity on the file since March 16, 2022, and neither party nor their counsel appeared or provided any explanation for the failure to prosecute the matter. In accordance with Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution, as there was no justification for the delay or non-prosecution. The absence of both parties and lack of representation or explanation left the court with no alternative but to dismiss the suit to prevent abuse of court process and ensure expeditious disposal of cases.

Court Disposition

suit dismissed for want of prosecution

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules.