[2017] KEHC 1769 (KLR)
The court declined to grant bail pending trial because the accused failed to demonstrate any change in circumstances since previous applications. The court found that the risk of interference with witnesses had not been sufficiently addressed, as the prosecution did not confirm that the remaining witnesses were all...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 1769 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Anthony Kiplangat
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nanyuki
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 7 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
- Outcome
- bail application declined
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Flight Risk, Witness Interference, Changed Circumstances
- 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
Anthony Kiplangat
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial in light of the circumstances presented.
- 2 Whether the accused has demonstrated a change in circumstances to warrant reconsideration of bail.
- 3 Whether the accused poses a flight risk or is likely to interfere with witnesses if released on bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined to grant bail pending trial because the accused failed to demonstrate any change in circumstances since previous applications. The court found that the risk of interference with witnesses had not been sufficiently addressed, as the prosecution did not confirm that the remaining witnesses were all police officers. Additionally, the accused did not provide evidence that the risk to his life had diminished or that he would not abscond if released. The court emphasized that the accused bears the burden of showing changed circumstances to justify reconsideration of bail, and in the absence of such demonstration, the application must fail.
Court Disposition
bail application declined
Orders
- The application for bail pending trial is declined.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NANYUKI
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 7 OF 2016
REPUBLIC....................................................PROSECUTOR
versus
ANTHONY KIPLANGAT.......................................ACCUSED
JUDGMENT
1. ANTHONY KIPLANGAT (the accused) was arraigned before this court on 16th March 2016. However it was not until 14th June 2016 when the charge of murder were put to the accused. The delay was partly because the psychiatrist was on leave and plea could not be taken in absence of a psychiatrist report.
2. Subsequently accused applied for bail pending trial and by this court’s ruling of 11th October 2016 his application was declined. The court in declining to grant bail considered the depositions of the investigating officer where that officer opposed the application for bail on the grounds that the accused was flight risk, was likely to interfere with witnesses and that he was at risk of being harmed by members of the public.
3. The accused again renewed his application for bail and this court by its ruling of 4th April 2017 declined to grant the accused bail on the basis that the circumstances had not changed.
4. The court also ruled on 4th October 2017 on the accused renewed bail application on the ground that the circumstances had not changed.
5. On 8th November 2017 the accused renewed his application for bail arguing that the civilian witnesses had all testified and the remainder of witnesses were police officers and that accordingly the accused would not interfere with those witnesses.
6. It is important to note that the accused is entitled to make as many applications for bail as he desires. But in making those applications it is important to show which circumstance had changed.
7. The information the Principal Prosecution Counsel Mr. Tanui gave to the court on 8th November 2017 was that there were three more witnesses remaining to testify. Learned counsel did not state that the three remaining witnesses were police officers. It follows that the reason relied upon by this court in declining to give bail pending trial, that is that the accused might interfere with witnesses, has not been sufficiently been explained away.
8. Similarly the accused did not state that his life is now less in danger than before.
9. But perhaps the most important issue is that the accused has not demonstrated that he will not abscond his trial, which is now at its tail end if granted bail.
10. For the above reason I decline to grant bail pending trial.
11. It is so ordered.
DATED and DELIVERED at NANYUKI this 6th day of DECEMBER 2017
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
CORAM
Before Justice Mary Kasango
Court Assistant: Njue/Mariastella
Accused: Anthony Kiplangat ..........................................
For Accused:…................................................................
For the State: …..............................................................
Language: ......................................................................
COURT
Ruling delivered in open court.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE