[2013] KEHC 7065 (KLR)
The court held that the accused is entitled to bond unless the State demonstrates compelling reasons to the contrary. In this case, the State's objections were unsupported by evidence, as no affidavit or other proof was provided despite being given time to do so. The court found that mere statements from the bar do...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 7065 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Joseph Otieno Ogere
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyandarua
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 22 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Bond Application Pending Trial
- Outcome
- Bond granted to the accused on specified conditions.
- Legal Topics
- Bail and Bond, Compelling Reasons, Burden of Proof, Pretrial Release
- 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
Joseph Otieno Ogere
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Bond Application Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to be released on bond pending trial.
- 2 Whether the State has demonstrated compelling reasons to deny bond.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the accused is entitled to bond unless the State demonstrates compelling reasons to the contrary. In this case, the State's objections were unsupported by evidence, as no affidavit or other proof was provided despite being given time to do so. The court found that mere statements from the bar do not amount to compelling reasons. Consequently, the accused was granted bond on specified conditions, as the State failed to discharge its burden of proof.
Court Disposition
Bond granted to the accused on specified conditions.
Orders
- The accused shall execute a bond of Kshs. 3 million with two substantial sureties of similar amount.
- The sureties shall be examined by the Deputy Registrar.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
Cases in Magistrate Courts
Criminal Revision 22 of 2012 [if !mso]> <style> v:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]
REPUBLIC……………………………………………PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
JOSEPH OTIENO OGERE………………….…………….ACCUSED.
RULING
The accused who is charged with murder c/sec. 203 as read with S. 204 of the Penal Code has applied to be released on bond pending the trial.
His Advocate Mr. Osoro urged the court to release him on reasonable terms.
Miss Valery the Learned State Counsel opposed the application on two grounds, viz:-
(a)That the accused person was arrested by members of the public who assaulted him before he was rescued by the police, that if released on bond he may be harmed by the mob.
(b)That he may be tempted to abscond for fear of the mob.
To this Mr. Osoro’s response was that the police are abdicating their duty of protecting the public including the accused. That it is the accused’s constitutional right to be released on bond and he ought to be so released.
I have considered the application and the rival submissions carefully. The accused is indeed entitled to be released on bond on reasonable conditions unless there are compelling reasons not to release him.
The onus to prove those compelling reasons lies on the State. Miss Valery has asserted 2 grounds but the same are merely statements from the bar as they are not backed by evidence. When the accused person first applied for bond on 18. 2.203 Mr. Mutuku Assistant Director for Public Prosecutions, then representing the State applied for time to file an affidavit. By the time this application was heard, a month later, no affidavit was filed. What does that say? That the State may not have any compelling reason that would warrant this court to withhold bond.
Accordingly bond is granted to the accused on the following conditions:-
1. That he shall execute a bond of Kshs. 3 million with 2 substantial sureties of similar amount.
2. That the sureties shall be examined by the Deputy Registrar.
3. That pending the trial the accused person shall attend court for mention of his case once every month first such mention being on 30. 5.2013.
4. Hearing on20. 6.2013
Ruling dated, signed and delivered at Homa Bay this……3rd…………day of……May…………….2013.
E.N. MAINA
JUDGE.
In the presence of:
Eudice Okombo Dholuo interpreter.
Miss Valary for the Republic
Mr. Osoro for the Accused.
Accused person.
[if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-US X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; font-size:10. 0pt;"Times New Roman","serif";} </style> <![endif]