[2014] KEHC 6175 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 6175 (KLR)

The court found that the prosecution's allegation that the 5th accused went into hiding was not supported by any affidavit or evidence under oath, and thus amounted to a mere statement from the bar. In the absence of any sworn averment or compelling evidence, the court held that there was no compelling reason to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 6175 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Joseph Kirimi; Defendant: Zachary Karungu; Defendant: Nicholas Kibaara; Defendant: David Kimathi Uhuru; Defendant: 5th Accused
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Case 25 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail Application
Outcome
Bail granted to the 5th accused on same terms as co-accused.
Legal Topics
Bail Application, Compelling Reasons, Pretrial Release, Burden of Proof
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Bail Application Compelling Reasons Pretrial Release Burden of Proof

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Joseph Kirimi

Defendant

Zachary Karungu

Defendant

Nicholas Kibaara

Defendant

David Kimathi Uhuru

Defendant

5th Accused

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail Application

  1. 1 Whether the 5th accused should be granted bail on the same terms as his co-accused.
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution's allegation that the 5th accused went into hiding constitutes a compelling reason to deny bail.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the prosecution's allegation that the 5th accused went into hiding was not supported by any affidavit or evidence under oath, and thus amounted to a mere statement from the bar. In the absence of any sworn averment or compelling evidence, the court held that there was no compelling reason to deny the 5th accused bail. The court emphasized that the right to bail can only be limited by compelling reasons, which must be substantiated and not merely alleged. Accordingly, the 5th accused was granted bail on the same terms as his co-accused.

Court Disposition

Bail granted to the 5th accused on same terms as co-accused.

Orders

  • The 5th accused may be released on a cash bail of Ksh.250,000.
  • Alternatively, the 5th accused may be released on a bond of Ksh.250,000 with two sureties of similar amount.