[2018] KEHC 1406 (KLR)
The court found that, although the accused is presumed innocent and generally entitled to bail, the pre-bail report and the circumstances surrounding the offence indicated a real risk to the accused's safety if released. The court noted palpable anger in the victim's community and the potential for harm to the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 1406 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Peter Chege Mucheru
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Murang'a
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 33 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
- Outcome
- application for bail refused
- Judges
- K Kimondo
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Compelling Reasons, Murder Charge, Victims 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
Peter Chege Mucheru
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny bail, specifically concerning the safety of the accused and the views of the victim's family.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, although the accused is presumed innocent and generally entitled to bail, the pre-bail report and the circumstances surrounding the offence indicated a real risk to the accused's safety if released. The court noted palpable anger in the victim's community and the potential for harm to the accused, as highlighted in the social report. The views of the victim's family and the requirements of the Victims Protection Act 2014 were also considered. The court concluded that the safety of the accused constituted a compelling reason to deny bail at this stage, outweighing the presumption of release pending trial.
Court Disposition
application for bail refused
Orders
- The application for bail is refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MURANG’A
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 33 OF 2018
REPUBLIC...................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
PETER CHEGE MUCHERU.............................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused prays for bail pending trial. The notice of motion is dated 3rd December 2018.
2. The application is contested by the Republic.
3. There is filed a comprehensive pre-bail report dated 25th October 2018. In a synopsis, the report is unfavourable.
4. Learned counsel for the accused challenged the report. He submitted that the accused allegedly ran over the deceased; and, that the accused will in the fullness of time be making an offer for plea agreement. He submitted further that the accused is not a flight-risk; and, will abide by the orders of the court.
5. The learned Prosecution Counsel submitted that the safety of the accused is not assured; and, that there are compelling reasons for denial of bail.
6. The accused faces the grave charge of murder; but he is still deemed innocent. Under Article 49 (1) (h) of the Constitution, he is entitled to bail pending trial unless there are compelling circumstances. See Muraguri v Republic [1989] KLR 181, Republic v Elias Kipkemoi, Eldoret High Court Criminal Case 42 of 2014 (unreported).
7. The overarching objective of bail is to ensure the accused attends his trial. Muraguri v Republic [1989] KLR 181. Relevant matters to be considered by the court include: the nature of the charge; the likely sentence; previous criminal records, the views of the family of the victim, the possibility of interference with witnesses; the temptation to abscond; and, the safety of the accused.
8. The accused is charged for the unlawful killing of Lydia Njoki Ngugi on 4th August 2018 at Kabati Kaguduini, Kandara Sub-County.
9. The social report concludes as follows-
“The circumstances of his arrest were characterized by aggression….it took the intervention of the police to rescue and safeguard him though part of his family opined that his security would not be at stake…there is a strong indication that he may suffer harm from members of the community if released on bond. The victim’s family on the other hand was left devastated and her children orphaned” [Ephasis added]
10. There is palpable anger at the victim’s home. The Victims Protection Act 2014 requires the views of victim’s family to be taken into account at this stage.
11. I empathize with the accused. But I have reached the conclusion that his safety is not guaranteed at the locus in quo. That to me is a compelling reason not to release the accused on bail.
12. The application for bail is refused.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNEDandDELIVEREDatMURANG’Athis 20th day of December 2018.
KANYI KIMONDO
JUDGE
Ruling read in open court in the presence of-
Accused.
Mr. Njoroge for the accused.
Ms. Gichuru for the Republic.
Ms. Dorcas and Ms. Elizabeth, Court Clerks.