[2015] KEHC 4895 (KLR)
The court found that there were no compelling reasons to deny the accused bail. The prosecution's concerns about interference with witnesses and threats to the accused's security were not supported by evidence. The Pre-Bail Report indicated that the accused had a permanent residence, good relations with the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 4895 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Linus Kinoti Marete alias Maina
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 23 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- RPV Wendoh
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Compelling Reasons, Presumption of Innocence, Witness Interference, Accused Security
- Source Language
- english
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
Linus Kinoti Marete alias Maina
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial under the Constitution.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny the accused bail.
- 3 Whether the accused is likely to interfere with witnesses if released on bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there were no compelling reasons to deny the accused bail. The prosecution's concerns about interference with witnesses and threats to the accused's security were not supported by evidence. The Pre-Bail Report indicated that the accused had a permanent residence, good relations with the community, and no likelihood of revenge from the deceased's family. The accused's medical condition (HIV) was also considered as a factor favoring release on bond. The court concluded that the constitutional right to bail should be upheld in the absence of substantiated compelling reasons to the contrary.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- Accused may be released on bond of Ksh 300,000 with one surety of like sum.
- Accused to be of good conduct when out on bond.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
HCR 23 OF 2013
REPUBLIC…………………………………………PROSECUTOR
VRS
LINUS KINOTI MARETE ALIAS MAINA………………ACCUSED
RULING
LINUS KINOTI MARETE faces a charge of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. By the application dated 6th November, 2014, he seeks to be admitted to bail pending the hearing and determination of the case. He swore an affidavit in support of the application in which he deponed that he has a constitutional right to be released on bond on reasonable terms; that he is presumed innocent till proved guilty and there are no compelling reasons why he should not be released on bond. He stated that he is ready to comply with any terms that the court may impose.
The application was opposed by the State. Corporal John Silunda, the investigating officer, swore an affidavit in reply, in which he deponed that the prosecution witnesses hail from the same area as accused, and he is likely to interfere with them; that the family members of accused’s wife whom he murdered are likely to take revenge and lynch the accused and his life is therefore in danger.
The court called for a Pre- Bail Report which was filed by Stephen Katuumo of South Imenti Office. I have considered the affidavits and the contents of the Pre- Bail Report. In an application for bond the court has to consider the following;
That accused will attend court if released on bond and this is the primary consideration;
That the accused will not interfere with witnesses;
The accused’s antecedents and characters;
The security of accused;
The gravity of the offence and severity of the sentence;
Although the investigating officer deponed that the witnesses all come for the same area as accused and he is likely to interfere with them, there is no evidence that accused will have influence over them. They are not his close relatives.
Accused is said to have a permanent residence with a family and is said to relate well with the community. The Pre-Bail Report indicates that the deceased and relatives are in good terms with accused’s family contrary to what the investigating officer deponed to. There is no evidence that there is likelihood of revenge against accused and accused’s security is not therefore threatened.
On a careful consideration, it seems there are no known compelling reason to deny accused bond. He is also said to suffer from HIV and that would be a good ground to have him released on bond in order for him to access medicine easily. In the end, I allow the application and grant accused bond on the following terms;
Accused may be released on bond of Ksh 300,000/= with one surety of like sum;
Accused to be of good conduct when out of bond;
Accused to attend court as will be required of him.
In default of any of the above terms, bond will be cancelled.
DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED THIS 4TH MAY, 2015.
R. V. P. WENDOH
JUDGE
Present:
Mr. Mulochi for the State
Mr. Kiogora for Applicant
Faith, Court Assistant
Accused, Present