[2018] KEHC 911 (KLR)
The court found that there was no evidence or compelling reason presented to deny the accused bond as required under Article 49 of the Constitution. The accused had already spent two months in remand due to delays in the probation officer's report, which was not attributable to him. The prosecution did not oppose...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 911 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Defendant: Ledupe Ltupuken
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 88 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond
- Outcome
- bond granted
- Judges
- A Mabeya
- Legal Topics
- Bail and Bond, Pretrial Detention, Constitutional Rights
- 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
Ledupe Ltupuken
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to bond under Article 49 of the Constitution.
- 2 Whether there are any compelling reasons to deny the accused bond.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was no evidence or compelling reason presented to deny the accused bond as required under Article 49 of the Constitution. The accused had already spent two months in remand due to delays in the probation officer's report, which was not attributable to him. The prosecution did not oppose the bond application, and no appeal or objection was filed. Therefore, the accused was entitled to bond as a matter of right, and the court exercised its discretion to grant bond on reasonable terms.
Court Disposition
bond granted
Orders
- The accused is granted bond.
- The accused may be released on a personal bond of Kshs. 300,000 with a surety of a similar amount.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
HIGH COURT CRIMINAL CASE NO 88 OF 2018
REPUBLIC....................................................................DPP
VERSUS
LEDUPE LTUPUKEN......................................ACCUSED
RULING ON BOND
1. I have considered the representations by both the defence, the prosecution and the probation officer.
2. The Probation Officer’s report was ordered on 15/10/2018. It is now two months later. The accused continue to languish in remand for no fault of his.
3. In my mind there is nothing under Article 49 of the Constitution to show that the accused is underserving of bond. No Right/ Appeal in opposition has been filed.
4. Accordingly, I grant bond to the accused.
5. He may be released on a personal bond of Kshs. 300,000/= with a surety of a similar amount.
Mention on 18/3/2019 to hear the parties on the application for withdrawal of charges. The interpreter be paid his todays allowances.
A. MABEYA
JUDGE
17/12/2018