[2021] KEHC 5695 (KLR)
The court found that, in the absence of any compelling reasons presented by the prosecution, the accused persons are entitled to bail as a constitutional right. The court considered the seriousness of the offence and the need to ensure the accused attend trial, but found no evidence or argument to justify denial of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 5695 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Eliud Njuguna Nganga; Defendant: George Kihara Ndichu; Defendant: John Ndirangu Nganga
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kiambu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E028 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
- Outcome
- bail granted
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Compelling Reasons, Presumption of Innocence
- 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
Eliud Njuguna Nganga
Defendant
George Kihara Ndichu
Defendant
John Ndirangu Nganga
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused persons are entitled to bail pending trial for the offence of murder.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny the accused persons bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, in the absence of any compelling reasons presented by the prosecution, the accused persons are entitled to bail as a constitutional right. The court considered the seriousness of the offence and the need to ensure the accused attend trial, but found no evidence or argument to justify denial of bail. Accordingly, the court granted bail to each accused on their own bond of Kshs. 1 million with two sureties of similar amount, and imposed a condition prohibiting interference with prosecution witnesses.
Court Disposition
bail granted
Orders
- Each accused shall be released on their own bond of Kshs. 1 million with two sureties each for similar amounts.
- The accused shall not interfere with prosecution’s witnesses.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
40 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KIAMBU
CRIMINAL CASE NO. E028 OF 2021
BETWEEN
REPUBLIC....................................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
1. ELIUD NJUGUNA NGANGA
2. GEORGE KIHARA NDICHU
3. JOHN NDIRANGU NGANGA.......................................................ACCUSEDS
RULING
1. ELIJAH NJUGUNA NGANGA, GEORGE KIHARA NDICHUand JOHN NDIRANGU NGANGAare charged with murder to which they pleaded not guilty. They have applied for bail/bond pending trial.
2. They are entitled to be released on bail/bond pending their trial unless there are compelling reasons not to release them. See Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution.
3. The state did not oppose their application.
4. In consideration of bail application, the court should order the terms of bail which would ensure the accused do attend trial and the seriousness of the offence ought to be considered. In those elements were considered in the case REPUBLIC VS. ROBERT ZIPPOR NZILU (2018) eKLR as follows:-
5. follows:-
“13. While agreeing withJustice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad’sjudgment,Justice Niki Tobigave an illuminating and persuasive decision when he said:-
“The main function of bail is to ensure the presence of the accused at the trial… Accordingly, this criterion is regarded as not only the omnibus one but also the most important. As a matter of law and fact, it is the mother of all the criteria. The Working Party on bail procedure in Magistrate’s Courts in the United Kingdom said in paragraph 22 of the Report:-
‘There are a number of other considerations to be taken account in deciding a bail application, but in general they are not in themselves reasons for granting or refusing bail, but indicators of the likelihood or otherwise of the defendant’s appearance.’…”
10. Gravity of the offence as a consideration was appreciated by Mbogholi Msagha, J in Criminal Application No. 319 of 2002 Priscilla Jemutai Kolonge vs. Republic (unreported) at page 3, wherein he held as follows:-
‘However, the nature of the charge or offence and the seriousness of the punishment if the applicant is found guilty must be considered in applications of this nature. I subscribe to the observation that where the charge against the accused is more serious and punishment heavy, there are more probabilities and incentive to abscond, whereas in case of minor offences, there may be no such incentive.’”
6. In view of the fact there are no compelling reasons to deny the accused bail, I allow the accuseds’ application and make the following orders:-
(a) Each of the accused shall be released on their own bond of Kshs.1 million (one million) with two sureties each of them for similar amounts.
(b) The accused shall not interfere with prosecution’s witnesses.
RULING DATED AND DELIVERED AT KIAMBU THIS 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2021.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Coram:
Court Assistant: Ndege
1ST Accused: No appearance in quarantine
2nd Accused - present
3rd Accused – Present
For 1st Accused: Mr. James Mururi
For 2nd Accused : Mr. Kirimi holding brief for Mr. Irungu
For 3rd Accused : Mr. Kirimi
For DPP: Mr. Kasyoka
COURT
RULING delivered virtually.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE