[2022] KEHC 13937 (KLR)
The court found that the Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation (KDIC) is already an active participant in the lower court proceedings and that its interest in the matter is established. The objection by the 2nd accused did not demonstrate any specific prejudice that would result from KDIC's enjoinment in the current...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 13937 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Alnashir Popat; Applicant: Anwar Hajee; Applicant: Hanif Somje; Applicant: Jinnit Shah; Applicant: Mukesh Patel; Applicant: Imran Limited; Applicant: Reybolds Limited; Applicant: Kenblest Limited; Applicant: Abdumal Investiment Limited; Respondent: Republic of Kenya; Defendant: Naaem Ahmed Shah; Defendant: James Jamlick Kaburu; Defendant: Nasir Haiderali Jessa; Defendant: Zulfikar Haiderali Jessa; Defendant: Nargis Aziz Jessa; Defendant: W.E Tilley (Muthiga) Limited; Applicant: Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application 571 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Enjoinment of Interested Party
- Outcome
- Objection dismissed; application for enjoinment allowed.
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Joinder of Parties, Interested Party Status, Fair Trial Rights
- 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
Alnashir Popat
Applicant
Anwar Hajee
Applicant
Hanif Somje
Applicant
Jinnit Shah
Applicant
Mukesh Patel
Applicant
Imran Limited
Applicant
Reybolds Limited
Applicant
Kenblest Limited
Applicant
Abdumal Investiment Limited
Applicant
Republic of Kenya
Respondent
Naaem Ahmed Shah
Defendant
James Jamlick Kaburu
Defendant
Nasir Haiderali Jessa
Defendant
Zulfikar Haiderali Jessa
Defendant
Nargis Aziz Jessa
Defendant
W.E Tilley (Muthiga) Limited
Defendant
Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Enjoinment of Interested Party
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation should be enjoined as an interested party in the proceedings.
- 2 Whether the enjoinment would prejudice the rights of the accused, particularly the right to a fair and expeditious trial.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation (KDIC) is already an active participant in the lower court proceedings and that its interest in the matter is established. The objection by the 2nd accused did not demonstrate any specific prejudice that would result from KDIC's enjoinment in the current proceedings. The court held that the participation of KDIC as an interested party would not infringe on the accused's right to a fair and expeditious trial, nor would it cause injustice or undue delay. Accordingly, the court dismissed the objection and allowed the application for enjoinment, emphasizing that each party would bear its own costs.
Court Disposition
Objection dismissed; application for enjoinment allowed.
Orders
- The objection of the 2nd accused is dismissed.
- The application of the interested party/applicant dated 8.7.2021 is allowed as prayed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
52 paragraphs
Popat & 9 others v Shah & 6 others (Miscellaneous Criminal Application 571 of 2019) [2022] KEHC 13937 (KLR) (Crim) (18 October 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 13937 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Criminal
Miscellaneous Criminal Application 571 of 2019
DO Ogembo, J
October 18, 2022
Between
Alnashir Popat
1st Applicant
Anwar Hajee
2nd Applicant
Hanif Somje
3rd Applicant
Jinnit Shah
4th Applicant
Mukesh Patel
5th Applicant
Imran Limited
6th Applicant
Reybolds Limited
7th Applicant
Kenblest Limited
8th Applicant
Abdumal Investiment Limited
9th Applicant
and
Republic of Kenya
Prosecution
and
Naaem Ahmed Shah
1st Accused
James Jamlick Kaburu
2nd Accused
Nasir Haiderali Jessa
3rd Accused
Zulfikar Haiderali Jessa
4th Accused
Nargis Aziz Jessa
5th Accused
W.E Tilley (Muthiga) Limited
6th Accused
and
Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation
Complainant
Ruling
1. This matter now comes up for the application by the Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation (KDIC), the applicant/Interested part dated 8. 7.2021. The application seeks that the Interested part be enjoined as such in this matter. None of the other parties to this matter have opposed this application, except the 2nd accused who has duly filed submissions to oppose the intended enjoinment.
2. In the submissions, it has been maintained that the applicant/Interested party has had ample time to seek the of enjoinment and that this present application is a delaying tactic to the disadvantage of the accused’s. That same therefore infringes on the right of the accused’s to determination of the trial within reasonable time as provided for Under Article 50(2)(e) of the constitution.The counsel for accused 2 replied on the following cases.i)Moses Wachira Versus Niels Bruel and 2 others, quoted in CCK and 4 others, Versus Royal Media Services and 7 Others, that;“In determining whether the applicant should be admitted into these proceedings as an interested party, we are guided by this court’s decision in the Mumo Matemu case where it was held.“……. An interested party is one who has a stake in the proceedings, though he or she was not a party to the case ab initio. He or she is one who will be affected by the decision of the court when it is made, either way. Such a person feels that his or her interest will not be well articulated unless he himself or herself appear in the proceedings, and champions his or her cause.”ii)MK Versus MWM and Another, Cause No. 268/2013, that court has power to order enjoinment of a party suo moto to enable the court effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all questions involved in the suit, provided that such would not result in prejudice or injustice to the other party.
3. I have considered the submissions made in opposing this application. Foremost, it is noted that the intended interested party applicant is admitted to have been enjoined in and is an active participant in the proceedings before the lower court. In the present scenario, the 2nd accused in his objection has not shown any prejudice that he stands to suffer by the intended enjoinment of the interested party to these proceedings. On my part, I also do not see any.
4. I accordingly therefore dismiss the objection of the 2nd accused. I allow the application of the interested party/applicant dated 8. 7.2021 as prayed. Each party shall bear own costs of this application. It is so ordered.
D. O. OGEMBOJUDGE18TH OCTOBER, 2022. COURT:Ruling read out on-line in the presence of Ms. Dave for 3rd to 6th accused, Ms. Wairimu for Kibe Mungai and Mr. Karani for the Interested Parties, Mr. Yegon for 1st accused, Mr. Mackenzie for Kithi for 2nd accused and Ms. Akunja for the DPP.D. O. OGEMBOJUDGE18TH OCTOBER, 2022. 18th October 18, 2022Before Hon. D. O. Ogembo – J.Court assistant – KathomiMr. Karani:All parties had filed submissions on the application dated 20. 12. 2019. It seeks a review of the ruling of the lower court. We pray for date to highlight same.Ms. Dave:I agree with the submissions.Ms. Wairimu:I confirm the position. We pray for a ruling date.Mr. Yegon:We pray for ruling date.Mr. Mackenzie:We also pray for a ruling date.Ms. Akunja:We agree.Mr. Karani:We have always asked for highlightings.Court:Matter fixed for highlighting. Hearing 24. 1.2023.