[2023] KEHC 21119 (KLR)
The court found that there were no compelling reasons presented by the prosecution to deny the accused bail. The key consideration is the likelihood of the accused attending court during trial. Since the prosecution did not raise any concerns regarding the accused's attendance or present any compelling reasons, the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 21119 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Wycklife Tinega Omiti alias William Omiti alias Wilfred Omiti
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kiambu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E018 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail Application
- Outcome
- Application for bail pending trial allowed.
- Judges
- PM Mulwa
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Compelling Reasons, Right to Bond, Murder Charge
- 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
Applicant
Wycklife Tinega Omiti alias William Omiti alias Wilfred Omiti
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial for the offence of murder.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny the accused bail as required under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there were no compelling reasons presented by the prosecution to deny the accused bail. The key consideration is the likelihood of the accused attending court during trial. Since the prosecution did not raise any concerns regarding the accused's attendance or present any compelling reasons, the court exercised its discretion in favor of granting bail. The accused's personal circumstances, including his age, orphan status, and lack of prior criminal record, were considered. The court thus allowed the application for bail pending trial, setting the bond at Kshs 500,000 with one surety of a similar amount.
Court Disposition
Application for bail pending trial allowed.
Orders
- The accused may be released on a bond of Kshs 500,000 with one surety of a similar amount.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
Republic v Omiti (Criminal Case E018 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 21119 (KLR) (3 August 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 21119 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kiambu
Criminal Case E018 of 2023
PM Mulwa, J
August 3, 2023
Between
Republic
Prosecution
and
Wycklife Tinega Omiti alias William Omiti alias Wilfred Omiti
Accused
Ruling
1. The accused herein Wycklife Tinega Omiti alias William Omiti alias Wilfred Omiti is charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars are that on the night of 6th - March 7, 2023, in the Munyu area in Gatuanyaga Ward, Thika East Sub-County within Kiambu, County murdered Daniel Njuguna Mungai.
2. A mental assessment was conducted on April 27, 2023, in which the accused was found fit to plead. Upon plea on May 23, 2023, the accused denied the charge and stated: “I am saying that I did not kill anybody, I only bought a cell phone”. A plea of not guilty was entered.
3. Ms. Githua counsel for the accused person pleaded with the court to release the accused on lenient bond terms, considering he is 20 years of age and that he undertakes to comply with any conditions set by the court.
4. Mr Muriuki the state counsel was not opposed to the release of the accused on bond but urged the court to call for a plea bail report.
5. The pre-bail report was filed on June 19, 2023. The community and local administrators were not interviewed as his family was unreachable. His kin could also not be reached. The accused mother and grandmother are deceased.
6. The pre-bail report stated the accused person has studied up to form 2 and had acquired a job training as a chef. He prays to be released on lenient bail terms. He states he is an orphan and lives with guardians.
7. The victim’s family was opposed to the release of the bond.
8. Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution guarantees an arrested person the right to be released on bond or/bail, on reasonable conditions, pending a charge or trial, unless there are compelling reasons not to be released.
9. This court in exercising its mandate to either grant or deny bail pending trial is guided by the Judiciary Bail and Bond Policy Guidelines which recognize that an accused person should be released on bond pending trial unless there are compelling reasons. The prosecution is vested with the duty of bringing to the attention of the court the compelling reasons that would warrant the denial of bond/bail pending trial.
10. The key consideration by the court in deciding whether to grant or deny bail is the accused attendance at the court during the trial. In the instant case, the prosecution is not raised any compelling reasons that would warrant the court to invoke its discretion and deny bail.
11. In the absence of any compelling reasons, this court will exercise its discretion and allow the application for bail/bond pending trial.
12. In the premises therefore, the accused may be released on a bond of Kshs 500,000 with one surety of a similar amount.
It is so ordered.
Ruling delivered virtually, dated and signed at Kiambuthis 3rd day of August 2023. P.M. MULWAJUDGEIn the presence of:Duale – court assistantMr. Muriuki - for the stateMs. Kimathi - for the accused personAccused - absent