[2013] KEHC 6824 (KLR)
The court found that there was no sound or sufficient reason presented to warrant a further downward review of the bail terms. The accused persons' inability to afford the current bail amount did not, in itself, justify a second review, especially since the terms had already been reduced from the original amount....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 6824 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Dickson Mbeya Marende alias Dicky; Defendant: Robert Kogi Mwangi alias Kogil
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 85 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Oral Application for Review of Bail Terms
- Outcome
- Application for further review of bail terms declined.
- Judges
- FN Muchemi
- Legal Topics
- Bail Review, Bond Terms, Judicial Discretion, Serious Offences
- 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
Dickson Mbeya Marende alias Dicky
Defendant
Robert Kogi Mwangi alias Kogil
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Oral Application for Review of Bail Terms
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there is sufficient reason to review the bail terms for the accused persons a second time and reduce them further.
- 2 Whether inability to afford the set bail terms constitutes a valid ground for further review.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was no sound or sufficient reason presented to warrant a further downward review of the bail terms. The accused persons' inability to afford the current bail amount did not, in itself, justify a second review, especially since the terms had already been reduced from the original amount. The seriousness of the offence, which carries a mandatory death sentence, and the fairness of the current terms were emphasized. The court concluded that the accused could meet the conditions if they made more effort, and thus declined the application for further review.
Court Disposition
Application for further review of bail terms declined.
Orders
- The request to review the bail terms a second time is declined.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 85 OF 2011
REPUBLIC……….....……....……………..….......…...…..PROSECUTOR
-VERSUS -
DICKSON MBEYA MARENDEaliasDICKY...…......…..1ST ACCUSED
ROBERT KOGI MWANGIaliasKOGIL......................2ND ACCUSED
R U L I N G
The defence counsel made an oral application seeking to review the orders of Judge R. Korir on terms and conditions of bail granted on 26th June 2013 as a result of another oral application. The terms were that the accused persons may be released on bond of Kshs.500,000/= with three sureties of Kshs.200,000/=.
The counsel for the accused persons Ms. Vera Abong'o holding brief for Maline Abong'o submitted that the accused persons have not been able to raise the bond of Kshs.500,000/= with the sureties required and that they could only afford a bond of Kshs.200,000/= and one surety of the same amount. The prosecution did not oppose the application.
The original orders for terms of bond of Kshs.1,000,000/= with one surety of a similar amount were given by this court in its ruling dated 2nd May 2013. Those orders were reviewed about one month later by my sister judge on request of the accused persons. In the reasoned ruling of this court, the seriousness of the offence carrying a mandatory death sentence among other factors were considered and appropriate bail terms and conditions given. The terms were reduced downwards by the 2nd court only four (4) months ago.
The issue which arises is whether there is a good reason to review the bail terms a third time and downwards once again as intimated by the accused persons. I am not convinced that this court has been given any sound reason why such review should be done. The accused say they cannot afford a bond of Kshs.500,000/= which was half the amount what this court had given. It is my conviction that the accused would manage to meet the conditions set by my sister judge which I consider fair and just in the circumstance if they put more effort.
All considered, I decline the request to do a second review of bail terms in this case.
F. N. MUCHEMI
JUDGE
Ruling dated and delivered on the 11th day of November 2013 in the presence of the accused persons, the defence counsel Ms Abongo Maline and the State counsel Ms Magoma.
F. N. MUCHEMI
JUDGE