[2015] KEHC 1626 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had expressed willingness to share all witness statements, including handwritten versions, with the defence, thereby resolving the disclosure issue. On the bond application, the court held that parties are at liberty to address the court on the review of bail without filing fresh...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 1626 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Erastus Ngura Odhiambo alias Baba Billy
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 115 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond Review and Disclosure Issues
- Outcome
- Application for review of bond and disclosure of documents addressed; parties permitted to proceed as directed.
- Legal Topics
- Bail Application, Disclosure of Evidence, Witness Statements
- 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
Erastus Ngura Odhiambo alias Baba Billy
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond Review and Disclosure Issues
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to a review of the bond application at this stage of proceedings.
- 2 Whether the prosecution is obligated to supply the defence with all documents in the format held by the prosecution, including handwritten witness statements.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had expressed willingness to share all witness statements, including handwritten versions, with the defence, thereby resolving the disclosure issue. On the bond application, the court held that parties are at liberty to address the court on the review of bail without filing fresh documents, as the issues are already clear from previous applications. The court emphasized that any further issues regarding disclosure or bail review would be addressed as they arise during the trial. The court declined to refer the matter back to the previous judge for interpretation, affirming its own jurisdiction to handle the review and related applications.
Court Disposition
Application for review of bond and disclosure of documents addressed; parties permitted to proceed as directed.
Orders
- Prosecution to share all witness statements, including handwritten versions, with the defence as requested.
- Parties may address the court on the review of bail application without filing fresh documents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 115 OF 2014
REPUBLIC ……………………………...........………PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
ERASTUS NGURA ODHIAMBO alias BABA BILLY……ACCUSED
RULING
In the course of hearing this matter, counsel for the accused person Mr. Onyango asked the court to review the application for bond in respect of the accused person. He submitted that the court had ordered in its ruling delivered on 1st October 2015 that the application for bond would be reviewed after the testimony of the prosecution key witnesses. He also asked the court to order the prosecution counsel to supply the defence with all the documents the prosecution is relying on, in the format in which these documents appear in the bundle held by the prosecution, to enable the defence to prepare for the case. Mr. Onynago told the court that the prosecution witness (referring to PW1) denied the format of her statements giving the impression that there are two different versions of that statement.
Prosecution counsel, Ms Mwaniki, in her reply told the court that all the typed statements are the same in the bundles held by each part; that all the witnesses have signed on each page of their handwritten statements but not on the typewritten statement; that the defence counsel did not ask for the handwritten statement for purposes of cross examining the witness. Counsel told the court that the prosecution has not denied the defence any document and are willing to share the handwritten statements with the defence.
On the issue regarding the review of the application for bail, prosecution counsel told the court that she seeks to have Justice Kimaru’s ruling interpreted to the parties or in the alternative this court should allow the prosecution to respond to the application for review. She said that the prosecution may file further charges against the accused person.
Mr. Onyango responded that the ruling of this court on the issue of bail is the relevant one and that there is no need to send the file back to Justice Kimaru for interpretation of his ruling.
I have considered rival submissions by both counsels. On the issue of the witness statements, I have considered that the prosecution is willing to share all the information (statements) in their custody with the defence. In my view therefore, this matter is settled and any issues in respect of the same matter arising in the course of this trial shall be handled as they arise and/or on a day to day basis.
In respect of the bail application, I direct that the parties are at liberty to address this court on the issue of review of bail application without necessarily filing fresh documents since the issues are clear from the bail applications so far canvassed in court. I am hopeful that the parties appreciated the ruling of this court on this issue which ruling in my view is the one the defence is seeking to have reviewed. I make orders accordingly.
Dated, signed and delivered in open court this 22nd October 2015.
S. N. MUTUKU
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Ms Mwaniki, prosecution counsel
Mr. Onyango, defence counsel
Mr. Erastus Ngura Odhiambo, accused
Mr. Daniel Ngumbi, court clerk