[2018] KEHC 7451 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant is in gainful employment, has a fixed abode, and there were no compelling reasons presented by the State to justify denial of bail. The State withdrew its objection after the families resolved their issues. The court emphasized that bail is a constitutional right and should only be...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 7451 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Phillip Isika Tito; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitui
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 30 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
- Outcome
- bail granted
- Judges
- LN Mutende
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Right to Bail, Compelling Reasons, Pretrial Release
- 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
Phillip Isika Tito
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to bail pending trial.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny bail to the applicant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant is in gainful employment, has a fixed abode, and there were no compelling reasons presented by the State to justify denial of bail. The State withdrew its objection after the families resolved their issues. The court emphasized that bail is a constitutional right and should only be denied for compelling reasons, which were absent in this case. Therefore, the applicant was granted bond with surety.
Court Disposition
bail granted
Orders
- The applicant is granted bond of Kshs. 500,000 with a surety in a similar sum.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KITUI
HCR. CASE NO.30 OF 2016
PHILLIP ISIKA TITO................................APPLICANT
-VERSUS-
REPUBLIC............................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Phillip Isika Tito, the Accused approached this court by way of Notice of Motion dated the 13thday of July 2017 seeking to be released on bail pending trial.
2. The Application is premised on grounds that, the Accused is a married man and employee of the County Government of Kitui with a fixed abode which he will not leave until the case is heard and determined, that the community from where he hails is not against him therefore there are no threats to his life and he is ready and willing to participate in the trial to the end.
3. The State/Respondent filed a response. NO. 235072 IP Julius Omari deposed an affidavit stating that witnesses in the matter are well known to the Accused therefore there was a likelihood of accused interfering with investigations.
4. Counsel for the Accused filed submissions following directions given by the court where he stated that the case arose out of an unclear circumstances surrounding a road traffic accident and all the persons who were with the Accused recorded statements.
5. There were no reasons to have the accused denied bail which is a right as investigations were concluded on 28. 12. 2016.
6. When the matter came up for mention today, Mr. Mamba, learned State Counsel notified the court that families of the deceased and accused met and resolved issues surrounding the case therefore the state did not have any objection to the Accused being released on bail.
7. Bail is a Constitutional right. A person can only be denied if there are compelling reasons requiring incarceration. The Primary consideration is whether the Accused will turn up for trial.
8. It has been averred that the Accused is in gainful employment and resides at his home which is a fixed abode. In the circumstances, I have absolutely no reason to deny him bail. In the premises, I grant him bond of Kshs. 500,000/= with a surety in a similar sum.
9. It is so ordered.
Dated, signedand delivered in Kituithis 20thday of March, 2018
L.N. MUTENDE
JUDGE