[2024] KECA 1730 (KLR)
The court found that the delay of approximately 12 years in filing the application for extension of time was inordinate and not satisfactorily explained. The applicant's claim that he was not supplied with a copy of the High Court judgment was unsubstantiated, and there was no evidence of any attempt to pursue the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KECA 1730 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Julius Lepeye Lelerte; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Application E194 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, Robbery With Violence, 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
Julius Lepeye Lelerte
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 of 12 years in seeking extension of time to file a notice of appeal.
- 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to grant extension of time in the circumstances presented.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the delay of approximately 12 years in filing the application for extension of time was inordinate and not satisfactorily explained. The applicant's claim that he was not supplied with a copy of the High Court judgment was unsubstantiated, and there was no evidence of any attempt to pursue the appeal or obtain the judgment during the intervening period. The court concluded that the application was an afterthought and that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant the exercise of the court's discretion in his favour. Accordingly, the application for extension of time was dismissed.
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
21 paragraphs
Lelerte v Republic (Criminal Application E194 of 2024) [2024] KECA 1730 (KLR) (4 December 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KECA 1730 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Court of Appeal at Nakuru
Criminal Application E194 of 2024
MA Warsame, JA
December 4, 2024
Between
Julius Lepeye Lelerte
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
(An application for extension of time to file a notice of appeal, against the judgment of the High Court at Nakuru (Ouko J. & Omondi J.) dated 24th February 2012, in HCCRA No. 94 OF 2009)
Ruling
1. The applicant, Julius Lepeye has filed an application dated 4th June 2024, seeking extension of time to file a notice of appeal. He deposes that he was charged with the offence of robbery with violence contrary to section 296(2) of the Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment in a judgment delivered on 24th February 2012.
2. He avers that he was unable to file the appeal because he was not supplied with a copy of the High Court judgment.
3. As was stated in Fakir Mohamed vs. Joseph Mugambi & Two Others, Civil Application No. Nai. 332/04 (unreported) on the discretion of this Court in a Rule 4 application:“As it is unfettered, there is no limit to the number of actors the court would consider so long as they are relevant. The period of delay, the reason for the delay, (possibly) the chances of the appeal succeeding if the application is granted; the degree of prejudice to the respondent if the application is granted, the effect of the delay on public administration, the importance of compliance with time limits; the resources of the parties, whether the matter raises issues of public importance are all relevant but not exhaustively factors. ”
4. The delay in filing the present application is about 12 years. In my view this delay is inordinate and the explanation that the delay was occasioned by the Court is unsubstantiated. There was no indication that the applicant intended to appeal, and it is evident that the appeal is simply an afterthought.
5. Consequently, I decline to exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant and dismiss the application
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU THIS 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024. I certify that this is a True copy of the original.SignedDeputy RegistrarM. WARSAME..................................JUDGE OF APPEAL