[2016] KEHC 1793 (KLR)
The court found that the State failed to provide any fresh or compelling reasons to continue denying the accused bond. The initial concerns about flight risk and interference with witnesses were no longer substantiated, as most witnesses had already testified and the latest pre-bail assessment indicated the accused...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 1793 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Dominic Muringe Nyaundi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisii
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 25 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Renewed Bond Application Pending Trial
- Outcome
- Application for bond allowed.
- Judges
- WA Okwany
- Legal Topics
- Pre Trial Bail, Bond Pending Trial, Flight Risk, Witness Interference, Constitutional Rights
- 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
Dominic Muringe Nyaundi
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Renewed Bond Application Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused should be granted bond pending trial in light of previous denial based on flight risk.
- 2 Whether the State has provided compelling reasons to continue denying bond to the accused.
- 3 Whether the passage of time and changed circumstances affect the accused's eligibility for bond.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the State failed to provide any fresh or compelling reasons to continue denying the accused bond. The initial concerns about flight risk and interference with witnesses were no longer substantiated, as most witnesses had already testified and the latest pre-bail assessment indicated the accused had strong community ties and support. The constitutional presumption in favor of granting bond, absent compelling reasons to the contrary, was determinative. Therefore, the accused was entitled to be released on bond on reasonable terms.
Court Disposition
Application for bond allowed.
Orders
- The accused may be released on bond upon executing his own personal bond of Ksh.500,000 with two sureties of a similar amount.
- The proposed sureties shall be approved by the Deputy Registrar of the court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISII
CRIMINAL CASE NO.25 OF 2010
REPUBLIC..............................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
DOMINIC MURINGE NYAUNDI......................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused person herein DOMINIC MURINGE NYAUNDI is charged with the offence of Murder contrary to Section 203as read withSection 204 of the Penal Code.
The particulars of the charge are that on 14th March 2010 along Enoretet-Enoosaen Road in TransMara District jointly with others not before the court murdered CHARLES OUMA OBAJE.
2. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and is still awaiting his trial which has, as at the time of writing this ruling, proceeded with 5 prosecution witnesses.
3. The accused had on 11th February 2011 applied to be released on bond pending his trial which application was on 10th February 2012 dismissed by this court, differently constituted, on the basis that he was a flight risk.
4. On 22nd October 2015, Mr. Morache counsel for the accused renewed the accused’s application for bond while stating that a lot of time (more than 3 years) had lapsed since the accused was denied bond and that with the passage of time, circumstances had changed.
5. The State did not file any replying affidavit to show if there were any compelling reasons to warrant the court to continue denying the accused bond.
6. A fresh pre-bail assessment report filed by the Probation Officer on 18th December 2015 recommended that the accused person is suitable to be granted bond on reasonable terms as he had relatives who were willing to stand surety for him.
7 I have taken into consideration the fact that the accused has been in custody since March 2010 when the offence was committed. I also note that initially, the State had opposed the accused’s release on bond on the basis that he could interfere with witnesses if granted bond. To-date, most of the witnesses have testified and on 19th January 2016, Mr. Otieno counsel for the State intimated to the court that he had only 3 more witnesses to call 2 of whom are government officials. Under those circumstances, one cannot say that the accused could still be able to interfere with the prosecution witnesses.
8. Lastly, the fear expressed by the State that the accused could jump bail if granted bond has been dispelled by the Probation Officer’s latest report filed in court which is categorical that the accused had a home and relatives who were ready, able and willing to stand surety for him. Above all, the court takes cognizance of the fact that bond is a constitutional right of every arrested person that can only be denied where the State provides compelling reasons.
9. In the instant case, the State did not provide fresh reasons or at all, why the accused should be denied bond. In the circumstances, I hereby allow the accused’s application for bond in the following terms:
a) The accused person may be released on bond upon executing his own personal bond of Ksh.500,000/= with 2 sureties of a similar amount.
b) The proposed sureties shall be approved by the Deputy Registrar of this court.
c) The accused shall attend court whenever required to do so until the case is heard and determined or until further orders of this Honourable Court.
d) Should the accused default in any one court appearance without justifiable cause then the bond shall stand cancelled and the sureties called to account.
e) Hearing on 19th April, 2016.
Dated, signed and delivered in open court this 1st day of February 2016
HON. W. OKWANY
JUDGE
In the presence of:
- Miss. Boyon for the State.
- Accused in person
- Omwoyo: court clerk