[2023] KEHC 18647 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had already paid the fine imposed by the lower court and had been released pursuant to a Release Order. As a result, the application for bail pending appeal was rendered moot and otiose, as there was no longer any custodial sentence to justify consideration of bail. The court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 18647 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Patrick Njenga; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kerugoya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal E021 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Bail Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- bail application rendered moot and marked as concluded
- Judges
- RM Mwongo
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Appeal, Conviction Appeal, Threats to Witnesses
- 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
Patrick Njenga
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Bail Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be granted bail pending appeal after conviction for stealing.
- 2 Whether allegations of threats to witnesses by the applicant justify denial of bail pending appeal.
- 3 Whether the payment of the fine renders the bail application moot.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had already paid the fine imposed by the lower court and had been released pursuant to a Release Order. As a result, the application for bail pending appeal was rendered moot and otiose, as there was no longer any custodial sentence to justify consideration of bail. The court therefore marked the bond application as concluded without making any further orders on the bail application.
Court Disposition
bail application rendered moot and marked as concluded
Orders
- No orders made on the bail application as it has been overtaken by events.
- Bond application marked as concluded.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Njenga v Republic (Criminal Appeal E021 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 18647 (KLR) (5 June 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 18647 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kerugoya
Criminal Appeal E021 of 2023
RM Mwongo, J
June 5, 2023
Between
Patrick Njenga
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Applicant/Appellant was convicted in the Lower Court for the offence of Stealing Contrary to Section 268 as read with Section 275 of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to a fine of 30,000/= or in default 6 months imprisonment.
2. Dissatisfied he has appealed in to this court. In the meantime, on April 19, 2023 he filed an application for bail pending appeal.
3. The court directed that the application be served on the DPP who was directed to file his response. The court also directed that the Lower Court file be availed.
4. At the next mention on April 27, 2023, the Lower Court file had not been availed, nor had the DPP filed his response. The court directed a Probation Officers Pre-Bail report be filed as the Lower Court file was availed.
5. on May 3, 2023, the applicant was not produced in court and a Production Order was issued. On May 11, 2023 the court heard the bail application, wherein the applicant sought a cash bail of Kshs 5000/=. The state was given a final opportunity to file a response, the bail application not being one under Article 49 (1) (h) as the appellant is a convict. The state was also issued a notice to show cause why the applicant should not be released on bail.
6. On May 18, 2023 the DPP filed an affidavit by one Cpl W Wairimu No xxxx averring that the applicant had, since being imprisoned, issued several threats to witnesses who had testified against him in Kerugoya CMCRC No E284 of 2022. Thus, it was asserted that the applicant ought not be released on bail pending appeal.
7. The applicant filed a replying affidavit on May 19, 2023 denying the allegations in CPL Wairimu’s affidavit. He urged that there was no attached evidence demonstrating that the alleged victims of threats had reported to the police or any other authority. He stated that the claims on the said affidavit were unsubstantiated.
8. On May 23, 2023 the court received concluding arguments on the bail application and reserved its ruling for June 5, 2023. At that point the applicant’s counsel indicated that it is likely that the applicant will pay the fine.
9. As indicated by counsel, the applicant paid the fine of Kshs 30,000/= the following day. I have seen the receipt thereof on the Lower Court file. I have also seen a Release Order dated May 24, 2023 by which the applicant was discharged upon payment of the fine as follows:'The said prisoner may therefore be released in respect of this charge'.
10. Accordingly, the bail application has been overtaken by events and rendered otiose. Consequently, no orders, in respect thereof are made and the bond application is hereby marked as concluded.
11. Orders accordingly.
DATED AND SIGNED THIS 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2023. …………………………………….R. MWONGOJUDGEDelivered in the presence of:1. Mamba for the State2. Applicant present in Court3. Heyi for Applicant4. Court Assistant, Murage