[2021] KEHC 9186 (KLR)
The court found that the 3rd Respondent, as a police officer, has a statutory duty under the Police Act to issue police abstracts to members of the public who request them and pay the requisite charges. In this case, the ex-parte Applicants were involved in a road traffic accident and made proper requests for police...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 9186 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Inspector General of Police; Respondent: Commissioner of Police, Makueni County Base Commander; Respondent: Sultan Hamud Traffic Base; Respondent: Attorney General; Applicant: Peter Mwanyivu Munyika; Applicant: Josphine Njoki Chorongo; Applicant: Emily Masago Gibson; Applicant: Martha Mawasi Mwavula; Applicant: Chrispin Kililo Miganyo; Applicant: Matilda Mawasi Mghanga; Applicant: Thomas Mawora Kitimo; Applicant: Roza Walegwa Matata; Applicant: Jackson Mwarimbo Mwakichuchu; Applicant: Gregory Ndichila Mwanganyi; Applicant: Thomas Legwa Magema
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Makueni
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review Application 1 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Mandamus
- Outcome
- Application allowed in part; mandamus granted; declaration declined; costs awarded to Applicants.
- Judges
- GMA Dulu
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Mandamus Orders, Police Duties, Public Law Remedies
- 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
Inspector General of Police
Respondent
Commissioner of Police, Makueni County Base Commander
Respondent
Sultan Hamud Traffic Base
Respondent
Attorney General
Respondent
Peter Mwanyivu Munyika
Applicant
Josphine Njoki Chorongo
Applicant
Emily Masago Gibson
Applicant
Martha Mawasi Mwavula
Applicant
Chrispin Kililo Miganyo
Applicant
Matilda Mawasi Mghanga
Applicant
Thomas Mawora Kitimo
Applicant
Roza Walegwa Matata
Applicant
Jackson Mwarimbo Mwakichuchu
Applicant
Gregory Ndichila Mwanganyi
Applicant
Thomas Legwa Magema
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Mandamus
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Respondents, specifically the 3rd Respondent, are under a legal duty to issue police abstracts to the ex-parte Applicants involved in a road traffic accident on 04/03/2018.
- 2 Whether the court can grant a declaration against the 3rd Respondent in judicial review proceedings where such relief was not included in the statutory statement.
- 3 Whether the Applicants are entitled to costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 3rd Respondent, as a police officer, has a statutory duty under the Police Act to issue police abstracts to members of the public who request them and pay the requisite charges. In this case, the ex-parte Applicants were involved in a road traffic accident and made proper requests for police abstracts, but the 3rd Respondent failed to issue the documents or provide any lawful reason for the refusal. The Respondents did not oppose the application or provide any justification for their inaction. The court held that the Applicants were entitled to an order of mandamus compelling the 3rd Respondent to issue the police abstracts. However, the court declined to grant a...
Court Disposition
Application allowed in part; mandamus granted; declaration declined; costs awarded to Applicants.
Orders
- An order of mandamus is issued directing the Respondents to compel the 3rd Respondent to fill and issue police abstracts to the ex-parte Applicants involved in the road traffic accident on 04/03/2018.
- Costs of the proceedings are awarded to the ex-parte Applicants against the Respondents jointly and severally.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
49 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MAKUENI
JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2020
IN THE MATTER OF 8 & 9 OF THE LAW REFORM ACT
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE GOVERNMENT PROCEEDINGS ACT, CHAPTER 40 OF THE LAWS OF KENYA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ORDER 53 RULE 1 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE ACT
-AND-
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
REPUBLIC......................................................................................APPLICANT
-VESRSUS-
INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE.................................1STRESPONDENT
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
MAKUENI COUNTY BASE COMMANDER......................2NDRESPONDENT
SULTAN HAMUD TRAFFIC BASE.....................................3RDRESPONDENT
ATTORNEY GENERAL....................................................... 4THRESPONDENT
-AND-
PETER MWANYIVU MUNYIKA.............................1STEX-PARTE APLICANT
JOSPHINE NJOKI CHORONGO......................2NDEX-PARTE APPLICANT
EMILY MASAGO GIBSON.................................3RDEX-PARTE APPLICANT
MARTHA MAWASI MWAVULA.........................4THEX-PARTE APPLICANT
CHRISPIN KILILO MIGANYO .........................5THEX-PARTE APPLICANT
MATILDA MAWASI MGHANGA........................6THEX-PARTE APPLICANT
THOMAS MAWORA KITIMO............................7THEX-PARTE APPLICANT
ROZA WALEGWA MATATA................................8THEX-PARTE APPLICANT
JACKSON MWARIMBO MWAKICHUCHU... 9THEX-PARTE APPLICANT
GREGORY NDICHILA MWANGANYI............10THEX-PARTE APPLICANT
THOMAS LEGWA MAGEMA............................11THEX-PARTE APPLICANT
RULING
1. Before me is a Notice of Motion dated 20th August 2020 filed by several ex-parte Applicants herein through counsel Mr. Shem Kebongo & Co seeking the following judicial review orders:
1) An order of mandamus directed to the Respondents to compel the 3rdRespondent to fill and issue police abstracts to the ex-parte Applicants who were involved in a road traffic accident on 04/03/2018.
2) A declaration that the 3rdRespondent is in breach of their duty under the law in that he failed to file and issue police abstracts to the ex-parte Applicants.
3) An order for costs.
2. The application was brought under Order 53 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure rules (Cap 21) and the provisions of the Government Proceedings Act (Cap 40). Leave to file the substantive Notice of Motion herein was granted by the court on 10th August 2020.
3. The application is supported by the Statutory statement of the Applicants which lists the grounds for the reliefs sought as well as a verifying affidavit sworn by the 1st Applicant on 30/07/2020 which provides the facts relating to the road traffic accident in question and the reluctance by the police at Sultan Hamud to issue policeabstracts to the ex-parte Applicants in respect of the said traffic accident.
4. Though the application was served on the Respondents in October 2020 and acknowledged through endorsement of office stamps thereon, no response has been filed by any of the Respondents by the time of hearing the same.
5. The ex-parte Applicants counsel filed written submissions on 10th December 2020 but none of the Respondents filed written submissions or response to the application and thus on 10/12/2020 the court fixed a ruling date. I have to mention that the counsel for the Applicants relied on the case of Kenya National Examinations Council –vs- Republic – Exparte Geoffrey Gathenji & Others – Nairobi Civil appeal No. 266 of 1996 to emphasize that the judicial review court can issue mandamus orders.
6. Having considered the application, documents filed and submissions filed for the ex-parte Applicants, I note that under the Police Act, only police officers can issue a police abstract to members of the public in Kenya. Thus in my view, it is their duty to do so provided the Applicant for the abstract pays the requisite Government charges to the same. In any event, if there is any lawful reason for denying issuance of the same, such reason can and should be communicated to the Applicant for such police abstract. In thepresent case the police have neither issued the police abstracts applied for to the ex-parte Applicants, nor have they communicated to them any lawful reason for their failure to do so although they issued them with medical examination or P3 forms. Thus this application not being opposed has to succeed with respect to the prayers regarding issuance of police abstracts.
7. In their application the Applicants have also asked for a declaration be issued against the 3rd Respondent. The traditional English Judicial review orders were limited to orders of certiorari mandamus and prohibitions. However, Article 22 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 appears to have expanded the scope of judicial review orders and made judicial review proceedings a constitutional matter. In that context, it appears that declarations may be issued in appropriate cases in judicial review proceedings.
8. Having said so, the law under Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules (Cap 21) requires that the reliefs sought by an Applicant have to be those contained in the Statutory Statement filed with the Chamber Summons for leave. In the present case, the only substantive reliefs contained in the Statutory Statement is a prayer for mandamus. There being no request to amend reliefs sought to add another prayer, in my view this court cannot grant the declaration sought against the 3rd Respondent.
9. I will add that even where reliefs are properly sought, the grant of judicial review orders is an exercise of discretionary power of the court and may or may not be granted for reasons to be stated by the court in each case.
10. I thus allow the application dated 20th August 2020 to the extent that I order as follows:
1) An order of mandamus be and is hereby issued directed at the Respondents to compel the 3rd Respondent to fill and issue police abstracts to the ex-parte Applicants who were involved in a road traffic accident on 04/03/2018.
2) I award the cost of these proceedings to the ex-parte applicants against the Respondents jointly and severally.
Delivered, signed & dated this 15thday of February 2021, in open court at Makueni.
................................
GEORGE DULU
JUDGE