[2019] KEHC 4922 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 4922 (KLR)

The court held that the approval of a surety is not determined solely by the property or means of the person standing surety, but by the assurance that the surety can provide regarding the accused's attendance in court. In this case, the persons presented as sureties for the 5th accused did not know the accused...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 4922 (KLR)
Parties
Respondent: Republic; Defendant: Pauline Maisy Chesang; Defendant: Richard Lorunyei Moru; Defendant: Lawrence Metayo Lempesi; Defendant: Peter Maundu Mbithi; Defendant: Nuno Hassan Jillo
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Case 10 & 15 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Revision of Surety Approval
Outcome
application for revision dismissed
Judges
GV Odunga
Legal Topics
Bail and Bond, Surety Approval, Judicial Discretion
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Bail and Bond Surety Approval Judicial Discretion

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Respondent

Pauline Maisy Chesang

Defendant

Richard Lorunyei Moru

Defendant

Lawrence Metayo Lempesi

Defendant

Peter Maundu Mbithi

Defendant

Nuno Hassan Jillo

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Case / Ruling on Revision of Surety Approval

  1. 1 Whether the Deputy Registrar was correct in declining to approve the sureties presented for the 5th accused.
  2. 2 Whether the court should revise the Deputy Registrar's decision regarding the approval of sureties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the approval of a surety is not determined solely by the property or means of the person standing surety, but by the assurance that the surety can provide regarding the accused's attendance in court. In this case, the persons presented as sureties for the 5th accused did not know the accused personally and only knew his sister. The court found that such a relationship was insufficient to assure the court that the sureties could ensure the accused's attendance or assist in apprehending him if he absconded. Therefore, the court declined to interfere with the Deputy Registrar's decision to reject the proposed sureties.

Court Disposition

application for revision dismissed

Orders

  • The court declines to interfere with the Deputy Registrar's decision declining to approve the sureties for the 5th accused.