[2015] KEHC 8540 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 8540 (KLR)

The court found that the acquittal of the respondents under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code was not proper, as the section is intended to apply where the complainant fails to appear, not where the prosecution seeks an adjournment. Since the respondents conceded the appeal and did not object to a retrial,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 8540 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Republic; Respondent: Doreen Atieno Nyamunyo; Respondent: Erick Owino Ouma; Respondent: Jared Owino
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal 9 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; acquittal quashed; retrial ordered.
Judges
DAS Majanja
Legal Topics
Acquittal Procedure, Retrial Orders, Adjournment of Hearing, Conspiracy to Defeat Justice
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Acquittal Procedure Retrial Orders Adjournment of Hearing Conspiracy to Defeat Justice

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Appellant

Doreen Atieno Nyamunyo

Respondent

Erick Owino Ouma

Respondent

Jared Owino

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the acquittal of the respondents under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code was proper in the circumstances.
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution was entitled to an adjournment and, if not, whether the remedy was acquittal under section 202.
  3. 3 Whether a retrial should be ordered after quashing the acquittal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the acquittal of the respondents under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code was not proper, as the section is intended to apply where the complainant fails to appear, not where the prosecution seeks an adjournment. Since the respondents conceded the appeal and did not object to a retrial, and given that the interests of justice required the matter to be heard on its merits, the court quashed the acquittal and ordered a retrial to be conducted within three months. The court also made orders regarding the bond status of the respondents pending retrial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; acquittal quashed; retrial ordered.

Orders

  • The orders of acquittal issued on 22nd January 2015 are quashed.
  • The respondents shall be retried within three months from 1st January 2016.