[2013] KEHC 5555 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 5555 (KLR)

The court found no fault with the trial court's decision, noting that the evidence from the inquest witnesses and expert testimony was properly considered. The issues raised by the DPP, including the possibility of mechanical defects causing the accident, remain available as defences for the driver if charged. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 5555 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Japheth Onsorigo Asiago
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Revision 61 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Application for Revision of Trial Court Decision
Outcome
Application for revision declined.
Legal Topics
Criminal Revision, Dangerous Driving, Mechanical Defects, Prosecutorial Discretion
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Criminal Revision Dangerous Driving Mechanical Defects Prosecutorial Discretion

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Japheth Onsorigo Asiago

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Application for Revision of Trial Court Decision

  1. 1 Whether the trial magistrate erred in failing to consider the evidence of inquest witnesses.
  2. 2 Whether the trial magistrate erred in holding that the accident could have caused death by dangerous driving.
  3. 3 Whether the trial magistrate erred in acknowledging that the accident could have been caused by mechanical problems.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no fault with the trial court's decision, noting that the evidence from the inquest witnesses and expert testimony was properly considered. The issues raised by the DPP, including the possibility of mechanical defects causing the accident, remain available as defences for the driver if charged. The court emphasized that the DPP retains the discretion to order further investigations before preferring charges, as recommended by the trial court. Consequently, there was no basis to reverse the trial court's findings, but the DPP is at liberty to conduct further investigations and charge the driver subject to the outcome of those investigations.

Court Disposition

Application for revision declined.

Orders

  • The finding of the trial court is upheld.
  • The driver of the said motor vehicle may be charged upon completion of further investigations by the office of the DPP and subject to its direction.