[2013] KEHC 2839 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 2839 (KLR)

The court found that both appellants deliberately absconded from court proceedings after being granted bond and a stay of execution of their sentences. Their explanation for non-attendance was rejected as implausible, given that they were aware of their obligation to attend court and had been given mention dates....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 2839 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Peter Amare; Appellant: Fred Mukhono Mwashi; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal 48 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Bond Cancellation and Stay Vacation
Outcome
Bonds cancelled; stay of sentence vacated; sentences to commence immediately.
Judges
AW Macharia
Legal Topics
Bail and Bond, Appeal Procedure, Absconding Accused, Stay of Execution
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Bail and Bond Appeal Procedure Absconding Accused Stay of Execution

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Amare

Appellant

Fred Mukhono Mwashi

Appellant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Bond Cancellation and Stay Vacation

  1. 1 Whether the appellants' failure to attend court justified cancellation of their bonds and vacation of the stay of sentence.
  2. 2 Whether the explanation given by the appellants for their absence was plausible.
  3. 3 Whether the sentences imposed by the trial court should commence immediately upon cancellation of the stay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both appellants deliberately absconded from court proceedings after being granted bond and a stay of execution of their sentences. Their explanation for non-attendance was rejected as implausible, given that they were aware of their obligation to attend court and had been given mention dates. The court held that persons on bond are responsible for keeping track of their case and are not entitled to be served with summons. The appellants' conduct demonstrated a lack of interest in prosecuting their appeal, justifying the cancellation of their bonds and the vacation of the stay order. Consequently, the sentences imposed by the trial court were to commence forthwith,...

Court Disposition

Bonds cancelled; stay of sentence vacated; sentences to commence immediately.

Orders

  • The bonds for both appellants are cancelled.
  • The order of stay of execution of sentence dated 6th August, 2008 is vacated.