[2022] KEHC 16437 (KLR)
The court found that neither the respondents nor the applicants had filed submissions in response to the application for reinstatement. The application stood unopposed. In the absence of opposition and in the interests of justice, the court allowed the application and reinstated the one dated August 3, 2022. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 16437 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Twalib Mbarak t/a Tasna Investment Ltd; Applicant: Athumani Ngovi Omari; Respondent: Inspector General of Police National Police Service; Respondent: Director Of Public Prosecution (ODPP); Interested Party: Khamis Athman Mwanjira; Interested Party: Maryam Juma Benzai; Interested Party: Saumu Jumaa Hemedi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application E193 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Reinstatement of Application
- Outcome
- Application for reinstatement allowed.
- Judges
- A. Ong’injo
- Legal Topics
- Reinstatement of Application, Prohibition Orders, Security for Costs
- 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
Twalib Mbarak t/a Tasna Investment Ltd
Applicant
Athumani Ngovi Omari
Applicant
Inspector General of Police National Police Service
Respondent
Director Of Public Prosecution (ODPP)
Respondent
Khamis Athman Mwanjira
Interested Party
Maryam Juma Benzai
Interested Party
Saumu Jumaa Hemedi
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Reinstatement of Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application dismissed for want of prosecution should be reinstated.
- 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to orders of prohibition against harassment, intimidation, or investigation by the respondents.
- 3 Whether the interested parties should be ordered to deposit security for costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that neither the respondents nor the applicants had filed submissions in response to the application for reinstatement. The application stood unopposed. In the absence of opposition and in the interests of justice, the court allowed the application and reinstated the one dated August 3, 2022. The applicants were directed to serve the application afresh for further directions. The court did not make substantive findings on the merits of the prohibition orders or security for costs, as the ruling was limited to reinstatement of the application.
Court Disposition
Application for reinstatement allowed.
Orders
- The application dated August 3, 2022 is reinstated.
- The Applicant to serve the application afresh for directions on December 19, 2022.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
34 paragraphs
Mbarak t/a Tasna Investment Ltd & another v Inspector General of Police National Police Service & another; Mwanjira & 2 others (Interested Parties) (Criminal Miscellaneous Application E193 of 2022) [2022] KEHC 16437 (KLR) (24 November 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 16437 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Mombasa
Criminal Miscellaneous Application E193 of 2022
A. Ong’injo, J
November 24, 2022
Between
Twalib Mbarak t/a Tasna Investment Ltd
1st Applicant
Athumani Ngovi Omari
2nd Applicant
and
Inspector General of Police National Police Service
1st Respondent
Director Of Public Prosecution (ODPP)
2nd Respondent
and
Khamis Athman Mwanjira
Interested Party
Maryam Juma Benzai
Interested Party
Saumu Jumaa Hemedi
Interested Party
Ruling
1. The Appellants herein that is Mbarak T/A Tasna Investment Ltd and Athumani Ngovi Omari had their application dated August 3, 2022 dismissed on August 15, 2022 for want of attendance and prosecution of the application.
2. The appellants were seeking orders of prohibition/restrain against the Respondent jointly and severally from harassing/intimidating/summoning/investigating and/or dealing or interfering with the applicant’s herein jointly and/or severally by themselves, their agents, nominees, attorneys pending the hearing and determination of the instant application.
3. The applicants had also sought that an order of prohibition restraining against the Respondents do issue restraining them from harassing/intimidating/prosecuting and/or dealing or interfering with the applicants jointly and severally pending hearing and determination of Suit No 163 of 2021 and the suit property No Kwale/Tsunza/1164.
4. They had also prayed that the court orders that investigations by the County DCIO Kwale is malicious and in total violation of theConstitution as provided under Articles 159 (2) (c), 163 3(9) 2(d)(ii) and Article 259(i) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010.
5. The Court was asked to order that interested parties do deposit Kshs 5 Million in curt a security for costs. Directions were taken that the application as dated August 31, 2022 be canvased by way of written submissions within 30 days from October 24, 2022.
6. As at the time of writing this ruling, the Respondents have not responded to the application nor filed submissions.
7. The applicants have also not filed submissions. The application however stands unopposed and the same is allowed.
8. The application dated August 3, 2022 is reinstated. The Applicant to serve again for directions on December 19, 2022.
Dated, signed and delivered in Open Court/online through MS TEAMS,this 24nd day of November 2022HON. LADY JUSTICE A. ONG’INJOJUDGEIn the presence of: -Ogwel- Court AssistantMs. Kambaga for state/RespondentMr. Kyalo Advocate for ApplicantNo appearance for ApplicantHON. LADY JUSTICE A. ONG’INJOJUDGE