[2019] KEHC 8887 (KLR)
The court found that the Applicant had demonstrated genuine inability to raise the bond terms previously set, having remained in custody for over three years despite being granted bail. The prosecution had not advanced any compelling reasons to deny bail, and the Applicant's personal circumstances, as detailed in...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 8887 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Evans Ochieng Rachar
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 1214 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Further Review of Bond Terms
- Outcome
- Application for further review of bond terms allowed.
- Judges
- AM Cockar
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Bond Terms Review, Constitutional Rights of Accused
- 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
Evans Ochieng Rachar
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Further Review of Bond Terms
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Applicant is entitled to a further review of bond terms given his inability to raise the previous bond.
- 2 Whether the bond terms previously set were reasonable in light of the Applicant's personal circumstances.
- 3 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny the Applicant bail under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Applicant had demonstrated genuine inability to raise the bond terms previously set, having remained in custody for over three years despite being granted bail. The prosecution had not advanced any compelling reasons to deny bail, and the Applicant's personal circumstances, as detailed in the Pre-Bail Probation Report, warranted a further review of the bond terms. The court emphasized that bail is a constitutional right and must be accessible to all accused persons, regardless of their financial status. The delay in prosecution and lack of progress in the case further supported the need for reasonable bond terms. Consequently, the court allowed the application and...
Court Disposition
Application for further review of bond terms allowed.
Orders
- Applicant/2nd Accused may be released on a bond of KShs.50,000 with one surety of like sum.
- The surety should be his mother, who must provide her salary payslip, copy of identity card, and two passport size photographs as security for the Applicant's release.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 1214 OF 2018
REPUBLIC.......................................PROSECUTOR
V E R S U S
EVANS OCHIENG RACHAR................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The Applicant is facing a charge of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. He is charged together with 2 others.
2. Plea in this case was taken on 12th October 2015, six weeks after the Applicant and his co-accused were arraigned in court.
3. An application for bail pending trial was filed by the Applicant’s co-accused in the case and was conversed before Mutuku Judge on 18th April, 2016.
In its ruling on 26th April, 2016, the court called for Probation Reports on the accused. They were eventually filed and bail granted on 12th July, 2015.
4. On application for review of bond terms by Mr. Mogikoyo advocate on behalf of the 1st and 2nd accused and for bond on behalf of the 3rd accused this court varied earlier bond terms given in 2015 by reducing them to cash bail of KShs.100,000/= each and in the alternative to bond of KShs.300,000/= with one surety of like sum.
The court observed then that the State was not opposing the application for review by all the accused.
5. The Applicant’s co-accused were able to post the bond terms. The Applicant has remained in custody ever since 6th February 2015, a period of 3 years and 3 months. The Applicant applied for a review of the bond terms on 1st August, 2018 which was unopposed. The court reviewed the bond down to cash bail of KShs.40,000/=.
6. The Applicant filed an application in person dated 13th December, 2018 seeking a further review of his bond terms in this case. When the application came up for hearing on 5th February 2018, the State did not oppose the application seeking rather that the terms be such as would ensure the accused attendance in court.
7. Mr. Masara for the accused asked the court to give the Applicant free bond arguing that he was a first born child of a single mother and that he has been unable to raise the bond because he comes from a humble background.
8. I have had occasion to read the Pre-Bail Report by the Probation dated 13th June, 2016. It shows that as at that date the Applicant was 27 years old, was resident of Kayole and is married with one child. I noted that his mother was a teacher in Eldoret at the time the Probation Report was filed.
9. Bond is a constitutional right prescribed under Article 49(1)(h)of the Constitution. Every accused person has a right to be released on bail and or bond so long as there are no compelling reasons to deny him that right. In this case, no reasons leave alone compelling ones were advanced to deny the Applicant bail.
10. Let me state categorically that bail is not meant for the rich alone. A court is therefore enjoined to give reasonable bond terms, based on the peculiar circumstances of the case, including those of the accused.
11. The Probation Report shows that the Applicant is a first born of a widowed mother. The rest of the siblings were all in school at different levels. His inability to raise the bond terms have ably been demonstrated considering he has been in custody for over 3 years despite having bond terms.
12. It is also important to note case has never begun because the prosecution has not put any witness to the stand citing many reasons.
13. Having taken his circumstances into consideration as ably spelt out in the Pre-Bail Probation Report and his affidavit and the delay occasioned by the prosecution, I find merit in his application.
14. I will allow the Notice of Motion application dated 13th December, 2018 and vary the bond terms previously granted to the Applicant to the following terms:
i. Applicant/2nd Accused may be released on a bond of KShs.50,000/= with one surety of like sum.
ii. The surety should be his mother who will provide her salary payslip, copy of identity card and 2 passport size photographs as security for the Applicant/2nd accused release.
15. The case comes up for hearing on 13/14/15/05/19. The accused is remanded in custody till then.
DATED AT NAIROBI THIS 14th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019.
LESIIT, J
JUDGE