[2024] KEHC 9477 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish compelling reasons to deny the accused bail. The alleged threats to the accused's life were not substantiated, and the accused himself did not express fear for his safety if released. The claim of flight risk was unsupported, as there was no evidence that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 9477 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Jeronim Ekemeri Opetoka
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Busia
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E003 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail Application
- Outcome
- Accused admitted to bond.
- Judges
- WM Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Bail and Bond, Compelling Reasons, Flight Risk, Pre Bail Report
- 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
Jeronim Ekemeri Opetoka
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to bail as a constitutional right unless compelling reasons exist to deny it.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons, such as risk to life or flight risk, to deny the accused bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish compelling reasons to deny the accused bail. The alleged threats to the accused's life were not substantiated, and the accused himself did not express fear for his safety if released. The claim of flight risk was unsupported, as there was no evidence that the accused would abscond, despite his residence near the border and lack of employment. The pre-bail report indicated no prior criminal record, no community objections, and no evidence of drug abuse apart from excessive alcohol use. The victim's family opposed bail but did not cite any threats to their wellbeing. Accordingly, the court held that there were no compelling reasons to...
Court Disposition
Accused admitted to bond.
Orders
- The accused is admitted to bond of Kshs. 350,000 with one surety of like amount.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Republic v Opetoka (Criminal Case E003 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 9477 (KLR) (31 July 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 9477 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Busia
Criminal Case E003 of 2024
WM Musyoka, J
July 31, 2024
Between
Republic
Prosecution
and
Jeronim Ekemeri Opetoka
Accused
Ruling
1. When the accused took plea on 22nd July 2024, the prosecution indicated that it was opposed to his being admitted to bail/bond, and that it had filed an affidavit setting out the grounds. The prosecution also called for a pre-bail report. Ms. Waswani, the Advocate on record for the accused, submitted that the accused was entitled to be admitted to bond as a constitutional right, except where compelling reasons existed.
2. I made an order for a pre-bail report to be filed, and one was subsequently filed, dated 30th July 2024.
3. In the affidavit, sworn on 29th July 2024, by the investigating officer, it is averred that the accused person had alleged threats to his life by unknown persons, and he could be lynched by villagers, should he be released on bond. It is also averred that he could be a flight risk, given that he resided near the Kenya/Uganda border, and that he was not in gainful employment.
4. In the pre-bail report, it is noted that the accused person is 66 years old, and is married, with children. He had not been charged before with any offence, and did not abuse prohibited drugs, save that he uses alcohol excessively. The family of the victim was said to be bitter, and was not inclined to support his admission to bond, although it did not cite any possible threats to its wellbeing, should bond be granted. His own family and the community, through its leadership, have expressed no concerns or reservations about his admission to bond.
5. I have considered the submissions made by both sides, the affidavit by the investigating officer and the pre-bail report. I do not find anything tangible to move me to find and hold that compelling reasons exist for me to deny the accused bond. He has not, through his Advocate, expressed any fear for his life should he be admitted to bond. There is nothing tangible, from the affidavit of the investigating officer, pointing to the fact that he could be a flight risk.
6. Consequently, I hereby do admit the accused person to bond, of Kshs. 350,000. 00, with 1 surety of like amount.
RULING DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT AT BUSIA THIS 31ST DAY OF JULY 2024W MUSYOKAJUDGEMr. Arthur Etyang, Court Assistant.Ms. Joyce Odhiambo, Probation Officer.AdvocatesMr. Onanda, instructed by the Director of Public Prosecutions, for the Republic.Ms. Waswani, Advocate for the accused person.Mr. Ogola, Advocate watching brief for the family of the victim.