[2014] KEHC 7192 (KLR)
The court found that the allegations of threats to prosecution witnesses by the accused persons, as evidenced by a police report and the affidavit of the investigating officer, constituted compelling reasons to deny bond at this stage. The accused persons failed to seriously contest or rebut these allegations. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 7192 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Dennis Mnyota Chai; Defendant: Ramadhan Karisa Charo; Defendant: Jumaa Mumba Kalumbe Kalume
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 49 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond Application
- Outcome
- bond denied
- Judges
- GO Shikwe
- Legal Topics
- Bail and Bond, Compelling Reasons, Witness Interference
- 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
Applicant
Dennis Mnyota Chai
Defendant
Ramadhan Karisa Charo
Defendant
Jumaa Mumba Kalumbe Kalume
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused persons should be granted bond pending trial for the offence of murder.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny bond, specifically allegations of threats to prosecution witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the allegations of threats to prosecution witnesses by the accused persons, as evidenced by a police report and the affidavit of the investigating officer, constituted compelling reasons to deny bond at this stage. The accused persons failed to seriously contest or rebut these allegations. The court held that the right to bond is not absolute and may be limited where there are credible threats to the administration of justice, specifically the safety and willingness of witnesses to testify. The application for bond was therefore denied, with liberty to revive the application at a later stage should circumstances change.
Court Disposition
bond denied
Orders
- The application for bond by the accused persons is denied at this stage.
- The accused persons may revive the application for bond at a later stage.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
34 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MOMBASA
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 49 OF 2013
REPUBLIC.....….........................................….. PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
DENNIS MNYOTA CHAI
RAMADHAN KARISA CHARO
JUMAA MUMBA KALUMBE KALUME……..…ACCUSED
RULING
The three Accused persons above mentioned are charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the penal code. This is an application for bond which is premised under article 49(i) (h) of the Constitution which provides that,
“an arrested person has the right to be released on bond or bail, on reasonable conditions pending a charge or trial, unless there are compelling reasons not to be released”.
The application for bond is opposed on the grounds that if the Accused persons are released they will interfere with witnesses.
The investigating officer one Joshua Rume Oselu in his affidavit depones that the three Accused persons have been threatening the Witnesses in this case.
That one Dhahabu Makasi prosecution Witness No. 2 has made a report vide police OB No. 31/2/10/2013 at Mariakani Police Station on threats that were made against her.
This court had earlier on called for a pre bond report on the three Accused persons from the probation and aftercare service but the reports do not answer the allegations of threats to the Witnesses.
The same issue of threats has not been exhaustively tackled by the applicants. The upshot is that the allegations of threats which have been buttressed by a report vide police OB NO. 31/2/10/2013 have not been seriously contested and for the time being I find it a compelling reason not to grant the Accused persons bond.
The application can be revived and revisited at a later stage.
Ruling delivered dated and signed in open Court this 6th day of February, 2014.
…..............
M. MUYA
JUDGE
6TH FEBRUARY, 2014
In the presence of:-
Counsel for the Accused persons Mr. Mburu holding brief Magolo
Counsel for the State Miss Ogweno
Court clerk Musundi
M. MUYA
JUDGE
Court: Hearing 12th March, 2014.
….................
M. MUYA
JUDGE
6TH FEBRUARY, 2014