Republic v Frankline Muthiani Munyao [2021] KEHC 1057 (KLR)
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 1057 (KLR)
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Court
- High Court
- Panel
- MM Kasango
- Case number
- Criminal Case E027 of 2021
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- High Court
- Panel
- MM Kasango
- Case number
- Criminal Case E027 of 2021
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court held that the accused is entitled to bail unless compelling reasons are shown to deny it. No evidence was presented by the prosecution to suggest that the accused would abscond or interfere with witnesses. While the seriousness of the offence and the potential for a severe sentence are relevant considerations, they do not, on their own, constitute compelling reasons to deny bail. The court exercised its discretion in favour of granting bail, subject to conditions to ensure the accused's attendance at trial and non-interference with witnesses.
Court disposition
Bail granted with conditions.
Orders
- Frankline Muthiani Munyao is granted bond of Kshs.2 million with two sureties of similar amount.
- Frankline Muthiani Munyao shall not interfere with the prosecution witnesses.
02
Material facts
Parties
Republic
Applicant Counsel: Mr. KasyokaFrankline Muthiani Munyao
Defendant Counsel: Mr. KalwaAmounts and remedies
- Bond Amount: KES 2,000,000
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial for the offence of murder.
- 02
Whether there are compelling reasons to deny the accused bail.
- 03
Whether the seriousness of the offence and potential sentence should affect the grant of bail.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The prosecution did not provide evidence to show that the accused would fail to attend court if released on bond or bail. No compelling reasons were advanced to oppose the bail application.
- Respondent
- The accused, through counsel, sought to be released on reasonable bond or bail terms, relying on the constitutional right to bail and the absence of evidence suggesting he would abscond or interfere with witnesses.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution of Kenya
An arrested person has the right to be released on bond or bail on reasonable conditions unless there are compelling reasons not to be released.
- 02
Republic v. Milton Kabulit & 60 Others (2011) eKLR
The right to bond or bail is at the discretion of the court, especially for serious offences such as murder.
- 03
Republic v. Ahmed Mohammed Omar & 6 Others (2010) eKLR
The seriousness of the offence and the severity of the potential sentence are significant factors in considering bail applications.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court held that the accused is entitled to bail unless compelling reasons are shown to deny it. No evidence was presented by the prosecution to suggest that the accused would abscond or interfere with witnesses. While the seriousness of the offence and the potential for a severe sentence are relevant considerations, they do not, on their own, constitute compelling reasons to deny bail. The court exercised its discretion in favour of granting bail, subject to conditions to ensure the accused's attendance at trial and non-interference with witnesses.
Obiter and limits
- The seriousness of the offence is a relevant but not determinative factor in bail applications.
- The right to bail is not absolute and is subject to the court's discretion based on the facts presented.
Court disposition
Bail granted with conditions.
- Frankline Muthiani Munyao is granted bond of Kshs.2 million with two sureties of similar amount.
- Frankline Muthiani Munyao shall not interfere with the prosecution witnesses.
Source and reliance status
High Court
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
High Court
Judgment
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KIAMBU
CRIMINAL CASE NO. E027 OF 2021
BETWEEN
REPUBLIC.............................................................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
FRANKLINE MUTHIANI MUNYAO..........................................................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. FRANKLINE MUTHIANI MUNYAO, is charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. He pleaded not guilty. It is yet to commence.
2. Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution provides that an arrested person has a right to be released on bond or bail on reasonable conditions unless there are compelling reasons not to be released. It will be noted that the said Article has built, within it discretion which is given to the court in consideration of bond/bail. Justice Emukule (as he then was) stated the same in the case REPUBLIC VS. MILTON KABULIT & 60 OTHERS (2011) eKLR thus:-
“My understanding of Section (sic) 49 (1) (g) (h) is firstly, that the right of an arrested person to bond or bail in respect of any offence is solely at the discretion of the court seized of the application. Secondly, the only accused entitled to a right to an automatic bond or bail are those charged with offences (which may be referred to as “petty offences”) the punishment of which if found guilty and convicted) is either a fine only, or imprisonment for a term of less than six months”
3. The primary consideration in the deliberation, of an application for bond/bail is whether the accused will attend court if he is released on bond/bail. No evidence was provided to show that the accused would fail to attend court.
4. It is however important to state the seriousness of the offence is a fact to be considered and this is what was stated in the case REPUBLIC VS. AHMED MOHAMMED OMAR & 6 OTHERS (2010) eKLR thus:-
“... whereas the applicant is still presumed innocent; if he were to be convicted for murder, there is a possibility that the trial court could sentence him to death. To my mind, therefore, the severity of the sentence remains a significant factor for consideration in an application for bail pending trial."
DISPOSITION
5. Bearing in mind the above, I grant the following orders:-
a. FRANKLINE MUTHIANI MUNYAO is granted bond of Kshs.2 million with two sureties of similar amount.
b. FRANKLINE MUTHIANI MUNYAO shall not interfere with the prosecution witnesses.
6. Orders accordingly.
RULING DATED AND DELIVERED ATKIAMBU THIS 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Coram:
Court Assistant : Maurice
For DPP :- Mr. Kasyoka
For Accused :- Mr. Kalwa
Accused : FRANKLINE MUTHIANI MUNYAO:-
COURT
RULING delivered virtually.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.