[2021] KEHC 3520 (KLR)
The court found that, although the accused's family was willing to stand surety, the accused had previously absconded from the locus in quo and was only arrested over two years later, establishing him as a flight risk. The pre-bail report indicated he was a gang member and detailed strong opposition from the local...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 3520 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Francis Marubu Chege
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Murang'a
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 27 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
- Outcome
- bail refused
- Judges
- K Kimondo
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Compelling Reasons, Presumption of Innocence, Flight Risk, Victim Protection, Risk of Violence
- 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
Francis Marubu Chege
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny the accused bail pending trial.
- 2 Whether the accused is a flight risk.
- 3 Whether the safety of the accused and the views of the victim's family justify denial of bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, although the accused's family was willing to stand surety, the accused had previously absconded from the locus in quo and was only arrested over two years later, establishing him as a flight risk. The pre-bail report indicated he was a gang member and detailed strong opposition from the local administration and the victim's family, as well as a real risk of violence and revenge if released. These factors constituted compelling reasons under the Constitution and relevant statutes to deny bail, prioritizing both the accused's attendance at trial and his own safety.
Court Disposition
bail refused
Orders
- Bail is refused.
- Deputy Registrar to allocate early hearing dates for the trial.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MURANG’A
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 27 OF 2020
REPUBLIC...............................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
FRANCIS MARUBU CHEGE........................................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused person prays for bail pending trial.
2. The application is opposed by the Director of Public Prosecutions on three fronts: that the applicant is a flight-risk; that the pre-bail report filed by the Probation Officer indicates that he is a gang member; and, that his immediate family is unwilling to receive him back.
3. Learned counsel for the accused replied that the accused resides away from the locus in quo and has no previous convictions. Counsel also submitted that there is no evidence that the family of the accused are opposed to his release. Furthermore, the accused is still deemed innocent. In a synopsis, counsel submitted that there are no compelling reasons for denial of bail.
4. The overarching objective of bail is to ensure the accused attends trial. See Muraguri v Republic [1989] KLR 181, Republic v Elias Kipkemoi, Eldoret High Court Criminal Case 42 of 2014 (unreported).
5. It is a truism that the accused is presumed innocent. Under Articles 49 (1) (h) and 50 of the Constitution, an accused person is entitled to bail unless there are compelling circumstances.
6. Other relevant matters to be considered by the court include: The nature of the charge; the likely sentence; previous criminal records; the views of the family of the victim; the possibility of interference with witnesses; the temptation to abscond; and, the safety of the accused.
7. The Victims Protection Act 2014 also requires that the views of victim’s family be considered at this stage.
8. The accused is charged with murder. The Director of Public Prosecutions informs the High Court that on the 1st January 2017 at Kiangochi Trading Centre, Murang’a East Sub-County within Murang’a County, he murdered John Irungu Karuga.
9. The pre-bail report dated 15th December 2020 is unfavourable. It concludes that he is the leader or member of a local gang. After the homicide, irate villagers demolished his house and torched his property. There is a likelihood of further acts of revenge. The local administration and the victim’s family are strongly opposed to his release.
10. I find that the family of the accused are prepared to stand surety for him. However, the accused vanished from the locus in quo and was arrested over two years later. I have concluded that he is a flight risk. Furthermore, and as detailed in the social report, there is a real risk of violence which could endanger his own security.
11. In the end, I find that there are compelling reasons for denial of bail. Bail is refused. I direct the Deputy Registrar to allocate early hearing dates for the trial.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MURANG’A THIS 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021.
KANYI KIMONDO
JUDGE
Ruling read in chambers in the presence of-
The accused.
Ms. A. Gakumu for the Republic.
Ms. Dorcas Waichuhi, Court Assistant.