[2023] KEHC 25551 (KLR)
The High Court found that the applicant was punished for a scheduling error made by the trial court, which fixed the matter for hearing on two different dates, leading to confusion and the applicant's absence. The forfeiture of the applicant's cash bail and the requirement to post a new bond were held to be contrary...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 25551 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Julius Lenaisura; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E293 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Set Aside Forfeiture of Cash Bail and Warrant of Arrest
- Outcome
- Application allowed; trial court's orders set aside; cash bail to be refunded or original bond terms reinstated.
- Judges
- TW Cherere
- Legal Topics
- Bail Forfeiture, Revisionary Jurisdiction, Natural Justice, Bond Terms
- 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 Lenaisura
Applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Set Aside Forfeiture of Cash Bail and Warrant of Arrest
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the forfeiture of the applicant's cash bail and issuance of a warrant of arrest was justified in light of confusion over hearing dates caused by the court.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a refund of the forfeited cash bail and reinstatement of original bond terms.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the applicant was punished for a scheduling error made by the trial court, which fixed the matter for hearing on two different dates, leading to confusion and the applicant's absence. The forfeiture of the applicant's cash bail and the requirement to post a new bond were held to be contrary to the rules of natural justice and the applicant's constitutional right to affordable bond terms. The court exercised its revisionary jurisdiction to set aside the trial magistrate's orders, direct the refund of the forfeited cash bail if already paid, and reinstate the original bond terms, thereby remedying the injustice caused by the court's own inadvertence.
Court Disposition
Application allowed; trial court's orders set aside; cash bail to be refunded or original bond terms reinstated.
Orders
- The trial magistrate’s order dated 19th July, 2023 forfeiting the applicant's cash bail and issuing a warrant of arrest is set aside in its entirety.
- The cash bail of KES 500,000, if already forfeited, shall be refunded to the accused person if he has already posted a new bail.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Lenaisura v Director of Public Prosecutions (Criminal Revision E293 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 25551 (KLR) (16 November 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 25551 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Meru
Criminal Revision E293 of 2023
TW Cherere, J
November 16, 2023
Between
Julius Lenaisura
Applicant
and
The Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Ruling
Background 1. Appellant was on 17th March, 2023 charged with various counts in Isiolo MCCR Case No. E125 OF 2023 which was consolidated with Isiolo MCCR Case No. E124 Of 2023 and E126 OF 2023.
2. The trial court record demonstrates that on 31st March, 2023, the case was fixed for hearing on 19th July, 2023.
3. Subsequently on 03rd August, 2023, the case was mentioned and fixed for hearing on 03rd August, 2023.
4. On 19th July, 2023, a warrant of arrest was issued and an order was made for forfeiture of cash bail. Applicant appeared in court on 03rd August, 2023 but the trial court was not sitting and when he appeared again on 09th August, 2023, his counsel’s explanation that the confusion in the hearing dates was caused by the court issued new bond terms on the ground that the cash bail had already been forfeited.
5. At the hearing, Ms. Rita for the Respondent conceded the application on the ground that Applicant was misled by the court as to the hearing date of his case.
6. I have considered the notice of motion dated 17th August, 2023 supported by an affidavit sworn by Loice Wangechi Gikaara, counsel for the Applicant on even date and I regret that Applicant has to suffer the consequences of the court’s blunder that punished him for its own inadvertence in fixing his matter for hearing on two different dates.
7. That Applicant has to lose his cash bail of KES. 500,000- and be directed to offer an alternative bond is against the rules of natural justice and tramples on his constitutional right to affordable bond terms.
8. From the foregoing, I find this is a proper case for this court to exercise its revisionary powers contained under Section 362 through to 366 of the Criminal Procedure Code (cap.75) Laws of Kenya.
9. Consequently, I find that the notice of motion dated 17th August, 2023 has merit and it is ordered:1. The trial magistrate’s order dated 19th July, 2023 in which a warrant of arrest for the Applicant and Applicant’s cash bail was forfeited is set aside in its entirety.2. The cash bail of KES. 500,000- if already forfeited shall be refunded to the Accused person if he has already posted a new bail3. If Applicant has not posted a new bail, he shall be released from custody on the initial bond terms pending reinstatement of the KES. 500,000- cash bail
DELIVERED AT MERU THIS 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023T. W. CHEREREJUDGEAppearancesCourt Assistants - Kinoti/MuneneFor Applicant - Ms. WangechiFor Respondent - Ms. Rita Rotich (PC-1)