[2020] KEHC 2217 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 2217 (KLR)

The court held that the prosecution failed to provide compelling reasons on a balance of probability to deny the accused persons their constitutional right to bail. There was no evidence that the accused had interfered with witnesses, attempted to obstruct justice, or posed a flight risk, especially as the trial was to be held in Nairobi and not Garissa. The mere fact that the accused are police officers was not sufficient to deny bail without evidence of abuse of their position. The court also considered the 2nd accused's medical condition and the right to health. The court found that any fears raised by the prosecution could be adequately addressed by imposing strict bail conditions,...

Citation
[2020] KEHC 2217 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Adan Ibrahim Salat; Defendant: Abdirahman Roble Samow
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
28 October 2020
Case Number
Criminal Case E011 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail/bond Application
Outcome
bail granted with conditions
Judges
J Wakiaga
Legal Topics
Bail and Bond, Compelling Reasons, Witness Interference, Public Order, Right to Health
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Bail and Bond Compelling Reasons Witness Interference Public Order Right to Health

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Adan Ibrahim Salat

Defendant

Abdirahman Roble Samow

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail/bond Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused persons should be granted bail/bond pending trial for the offence of murder.
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution has established compelling reasons to deny bail/bond under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution.
  3. 3 Whether the accused persons pose a risk of interfering with witnesses or public order if released on bail.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the prosecution failed to provide compelling reasons on a balance of probability to deny the accused persons their constitutional right to bail. There was no evidence that the accused had interfered with witnesses, attempted to obstruct justice, or posed a flight risk, especially as the trial was to be held in Nairobi and not Garissa. The mere fact that the accused are police officers was not sufficient to deny bail without evidence of abuse of their position. The court also considered the 2nd accused's medical condition and the right to health. The court found that any fears raised by the prosecution could be adequately addressed by imposing strict bail conditions,...

Court Disposition

bail granted with conditions

Orders

  • Each accused shall be released on a bond of KES 1,000,000 with two sureties of similar amount.
  • Alternatively, each may be released on cash bail of KES 500,000 with three sureties of similar amount.