[2014] KEHC 515 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 515 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's conduct of going into hiding for a year after the alleged commission of the offence constitutes a compelling reason to deny bail. The evidence presented by the investigating officer and the State's submissions demonstrated that the applicant poses a significant flight risk. The constitutional right to bail is not absolute and may be limited where compelling reasons exist. In this case, the applicant's antecedents and the circumstances of his arrest support the conclusion that he is unlikely to attend trial if released. Therefore, the application for bail was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to remain in custody pending the conclusion of the trial.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 515 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Aggrey Mang’ong’o Amugure; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
11 March 2014
Case Number
Criminal Case 21 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
CC Kipkorir
Legal Topics
Bail Pending Trial, Flight Risk, Murder Charges
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Bail Pending Trial Flight Risk Murder Charges

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aggrey Mang’ong’o Amugure

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted bail pending trial for murder charges.
  2. 2 Whether there exist compelling reasons to deny bail under Article 49 (1)(h) of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's conduct of going into hiding for a year after the alleged commission of the offence constitutes a compelling reason to deny bail. The evidence presented by the investigating officer and the State's submissions demonstrated that the applicant poses a significant flight risk. The constitutional right to bail is not absolute and may be limited where compelling reasons exist. In this case, the applicant's antecedents and the circumstances of his arrest support the conclusion that he is unlikely to attend trial if released. Therefore, the application for bail was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to remain in custody pending the conclusion of the trial.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for bail dated 21st July 2013 is dismissed.
  • The accused shall remain in custody pending the conclusion of his on-going trial.