https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1188

Nyawira v Republic (Criminal Application E028 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1188 (KLR) (19 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KECA 1188 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Court of Appeal at Nakuru Criminal Application E028 of 2026 AI Hassan, JA June 19, 2026 Between Daniel Wambugu Nyawira Appellant and Republic Respondent (Being an application for extension of time to appeal the Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nakuru (Kariuki, J.) delivered on 5th October 2021 in HCCRA NO. 19 OF 2018 Criminal Appeal 19 of 2018 ) Ruling 1.The applicant, Daniel Wambugu Nyawira, seeks an extension of time to lodge an appeal out of time against a decision of the High Court of Kenya at Nyahururu in Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 2018, which upheld his conviction and sentence for the offence of defilement. 2.The application is dated 7th May 2026. It is supported by an undated affidavit that is fingerprinted without clear evidence as to whether it was commissioned. In it, the applicant explains that the failure to lodge the appeal within the statutory period was occasioned by a delay in obtaining a copy of the typed proceedings and judgment from the High Court registry. The Director of Public Prosecutions, in its submissions dated 12th May 2026, states that it is not opposed to the application. 3.The Supreme Court in Salat v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 7 others (Application 16 of 2014) [2014] crystallised the principles governing extension of time as follows:i.Extension of time being not a right of a party, but an equitable remedy that is only available to a deserving party at the discretion of the Court;ii.The party who seeks extension of time has the burden of laying a basis to the satisfaction of the Court;iii.Whether the Court should exercise the discretion to extend time is a consideration to be made on a case-by-case basis;iv.Where there is a reasonable cause for the delay, the same should be expressed to the satisfaction of the Court;v.Whether there will be any prejudice suffered by the respondents if extension is granted;vi.Whether the application has been brought without undue delay;vii.In certain other cases public interest should be a consideration for extending time. 4.The delay in lodging the instant application extends to approximately four years, a period that is patently inordinate.The applicant explains that the delay was occasioned by a delay in obtaining a copy of the typed proceedings and judgment from the registry. I am alive to the formidable constraints under which an incarcerated prisoner without legal representation must operate in seeking to access court registries, as well as the bureaucratic delays that are often attendant to such processes. The applicant, who is serving a sentence of life imprisonment, ought not to be denied the opportunity to pursue his appellate rights. In the circumstances, I find it just to exercise my discretion in his favour to enable him to pursue his right of appeal. 5.In the result, I allow the application and direct that the applicant do file a notice of appeal within fourteen (14) days of this ruling. The prison authorities should extend to the applicant such assistance as will ensure the notice is filed and lodged at the registry of this Court within the time I have stipulated. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU THIS 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026.AHMED ISSACK.....................................JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a True copy of the originalSigned DEPUTY REGISTRAR