[2025] KEHC 4559 (KLR)
The High Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the applicant's motion for leave to appeal out of time because it had already rendered its decision on the substantive appeal. The proper forum for such an application is the Court of Appeal. The court relied on the principle that jurisdiction is...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 4559 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: James Kinyoo Musya; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kibera
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E032 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
- Outcome
- application dismissed for want of jurisdiction
- Judges
- DR Kavedza
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Jurisdiction of High Court, Criminal Appeals Procedure
- 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
James Kinyoo Musya
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal out of time after it has already rendered its decision on the matter.
- 2 Whether the applicant should have filed the application before the Court of Appeal instead of the High Court.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the applicant's motion for leave to appeal out of time because it had already rendered its decision on the substantive appeal. The proper forum for such an application is the Court of Appeal. The court relied on the principle that jurisdiction is foundational and cannot be conferred by the parties or assumed by the court. Since the applicant's appeal had already been heard and dismissed by the High Court, any further application for leave to appeal out of time must be directed to the Court of Appeal. Consequently, the application was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
application dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Orders
- The application dated 18th February 2025 is dismissed.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Musya v Republic (Criminal Revision E032 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 4559 (KLR) (8 April 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 4559 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kibera
Criminal Revision E032 of 2025
DR Kavedza, J
April 8, 2025
Between
James Kinyoo Musya
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant filed the present notice of motion application dated 18th February 2025 together with a certificate of urgency of similar date, seeking leave to appeal out of time against his sentence.
2. The lower court file has been submitted. The records indicate that the applicant filed a similar appeal at Milimani under Criminal Case Number 164 of 2014 and that the appeal was heard and dismissed.
3. It is my view that this court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the present application. The application should be made to the Court of Appeal since the High Court has rendered its decision on 10th September 2017.
4. The application is hereby dismissed.
Orders accordingly.
DIRECTION ISSUED IN THE ABSENCE OF THE PARTIES THIS 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025______________D. KAVEDZAJUDGE