[2014] KEHC 8079 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had made genuine efforts to comply with the bail terms but was unable to secure two sureties as previously ordered. The applicant had spent two years in remand, and her family had not succeeded in raising the required sureties. The court was satisfied that a single surety with...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 8079 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Angelica Mwau Wanza
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 58 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Application for Review of Bail Terms
- Outcome
- application for review of bail terms allowed
- Judges
- FN Muchemi
- Legal Topics
- Bail Review, Surety Requirements, Pretrial Release, Judicial Discretion
- 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
Angelica Mwau Wanza
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Application for Review of Bail Terms
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be allowed to substitute two sureties of KShs.500,000/= each with one surety of higher value for bail purposes.
- 2 Whether the bail terms previously set are unduly onerous given the applicant's circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had made genuine efforts to comply with the bail terms but was unable to secure two sureties as previously ordered. The applicant had spent two years in remand, and her family had not succeeded in raising the required sureties. The court was satisfied that a single surety with security valued at KShs.2,400,000/= would sufficiently secure the applicant's attendance at trial. The court exercised its discretion, guided by Article 49 of the Constitution, to allow the substitution of the two sureties with one surety of higher value, while maintaining the overall bond amount and other bail conditions previously imposed.
Court Disposition
application for review of bail terms allowed
Orders
- The accused shall be released on executing a bond of KShs.2,000,000/= with one surety.
- All other terms of bail imposed by Korir, J on 17th December 2013 continue to apply.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVSION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 58 OF 2012
REPUBLIC .................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
ANGELICA MWAU WANZA............... ACCUSED
RULING
This is a ruling on an application for review of bail terms which was argued orally in court by Mrs. Omung’ala for the applicant.
The background of this matter is that the court presided over by Korir, J granted bail to the applicant in its ruling delivered on the 17th July 2013. It was ordered that the applicant execute a bond of KShs.2,000,000/= with two sureties of alike amount. On the 4th December 2013 this court reviewed the bail terms on request of the applicant downwards to KShs.500,000/= with two sureties.
The applicant now submit that he has been unable to raise the two sureties of KShs.500,000/= but has one surety with a security valued at KShs.2,400,000/=. It is his prayer that he be allowed to present the one surety that he has secured upon of the bail terms being reviewed.
The State through Ms. Gichohi opposed the review arguing that the court has already outstretched its hand in reducing the bail terms from KShs.2,000,000/= to KShs.500,000/=. The accused faces a serious offence of murder and it will not be possible for his attendance to be guaranteed if he is granted very lenient terms that do not be fit the offence.
Mrs. Omung’ala sought to give a clarification that the applicant’s request is not for reduction of the bail terms but for substitution of the two sureties with one surety with a security of a higher value.
I have taken into consideration the history of this case. It is correct that the court has reviewed the terms of bail downwards, at a very considerable amount. The said orders were made in December 2013 which is about seven (7) months down the line. I believe the family of the applicant have made considerable efforts raise surety during that period which has not been fruitful. The plea in this case was taken on 6th August 2012 which period amounts to two years in prison remand spent in respect of the applicant.
I have considered the opposition by the prosecution which is based on fear of failure of attendance to court by the accused. I am convinced that the one surety of the elevated security will serve this purpose.
Having considered all the arguments and in the spirit of Article 49 of the Constitution, I hereby allow the application for review. The accused shall be released on executing a bond of KShs.2,000,000/= with one surety. All the other terms of bail imposed by Korir, J on 17th December 2013 continues to be applicable.
F. N. MUCHEMI
JUDGE
Rulingdated and delivered in open court on the 1st day ofJuly, 2014in the presence of:
1. Applicant
2. State Counsel
3. Mrs. Omungala for accused
F. N. MUCHEMI
JUDGE