[2016] KEHC 6512 (KLR)
The court held that the bond terms previously set—a personal bond of Kshs.500,000 with two sureties of similar amount—were reasonable given the seriousness of the charge (murder) and the associated risk of absconding due to the potential death sentence. The court noted that the hearing had not commenced and the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 6512 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Andrew Ondiek Nyabwanga alias Moi Obwocha
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisii
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 108 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond Review Application
- Outcome
- application for review of bond terms dismissed
- Judges
- WA Okwany
- Legal Topics
- Bail and Bond, Murder Charge, Pretrial Release Conditions
- 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
Republic
Respondent
Andrew Ondiek Nyabwanga alias Moi Obwocha
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond Review Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the bond terms previously set for the accused should be reviewed to allow release on one surety instead of two.
- 2 Whether the existing bond terms are reasonable in light of the charge of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the bond terms previously set—a personal bond of Kshs.500,000 with two sureties of similar amount—were reasonable given the seriousness of the charge (murder) and the associated risk of absconding due to the potential death sentence. The court noted that the hearing had not commenced and the strength of the prosecution's case could not yet be assessed. The application for review was dismissed as there was no sufficient reason to interfere with the original bond terms at this stage.
Court Disposition
application for review of bond terms dismissed
Orders
- The accused's application for a review of the bond terms is hereby dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISII
CRIMINAL CASE NO.108 OF 2014
REPUBLIC...............................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
ANDREW ONDIEK NYABWANGA alias MOI OBWOCHA.......................ACCUSED
RULING
The accused person herein is charged with the offence of Murder contrary to Section 203 and read with Section 204 of the Penal Code.
On 20th November 2014, the accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and was on 17th March 2015 granted bond pending his trial on the following terms:-
Bond of Ksh.500,000/= with two sureties of similar amount.
During the period of his trial the accused person shall not leave the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court without the written consent of the Deputy Registrar.
The accused to attend mention before the Deputy Registrar once after every 30 days with the first such mention being on 17th April 2015 and thereafter at such dates to be fixed by the said Deputy Registrar.
On 30th October 2015, the accused sought a review of the said bond terms while claiming that he was unable to raise the 2 sureties as ordered by the court and could only raise 1 surety. The accused’s application for review was not opposed by the State through Miss. Boyon who stated that she left the entire decision to the Court’s discretion.
The underlying objective of bond is to secure the attendance of the accused during the mention or healing of the case. Article 49 (1) (h) of the Constitutionprovides that the accused may be released on bond on reasonable conditions unless there are compelling reasons to deny him bond. The existing bond terms are a personal bond of Kshs.500,000/= with 2 sureties of similar amount.
The charge the accused faces is that of Murder which carries a death penalty of death sentence should the accused be found guilty. In a capital charge such as the one the accused faces, the likelihood of an accused person jumping bail is normally higher in view of the anticipated death sentence in the case the guilt is established.
It is for the above reasons that courts normally grant bond but on slightly stiffer terms to ensure court attendance. At this point in time, the hearing of the case against the accused has not commenced even with one single witness and it is therefore difficult to gauge the strength or the weight of the prosecution’s case against the accused as a means of determining the most appropriate bond terms. However, the charge sheet discloses that the prosecution will be calling a total of 6 witnesses in support of its case.
I find that the bond terms earlier granted to the accused were quite reasonable and find no reasons to interfere with the court’s findings at this point in time.
The upshot of my ruling is that the accused’s application for a review of the bond terms is hereby dismissed.
Dated, signed and delivered this 22nd day of January 2016
HON. W. OKWANY
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Miss. Mochama for the State
Accused in person
Omwoyo: Court clerk