[1995] KECA 36 (KLR)

[1995] KECA 36 (KLR)

The Court held that since the applicant was already on bail, he could not apply again for bail or for variation of bond terms in the same context. Additionally, the applicant failed to comply with procedural requirements by not specifying the conviction in his notice of appeal as required by rule 58. Most...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1995] KECA 36 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Martin M. Odhiambo; Respondent: Republic
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal 3 of 1995
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Variation of Bond Terms Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Bail Conditions, Appeal Procedure, Bond Variation
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Bail Conditions Appeal Procedure Bond Variation

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin M. Odhiambo

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Variation of Bond Terms Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant can seek variation of bond terms when already on bail.
  2. 2 Whether an appeal lies to the Court of Appeal against the granting of bail by the High Court.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant complied with procedural requirements for appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that since the applicant was already on bail, he could not apply again for bail or for variation of bond terms in the same context. Additionally, the applicant failed to comply with procedural requirements by not specifying the conviction in his notice of appeal as required by rule 58. Most importantly, the Court found that there is no right of appeal to the Court of Appeal against the granting of bail by the High Court. Consequently, the application for variation of bond terms was dismissed as incompetent and not maintainable before the Court of Appeal.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for variation of bond terms is dismissed.