[2016] KEHC 332 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution did not provide sufficient evidence of compelling reasons to deny bail. The assertion that the accused might cause fear and anxiety among witnesses was not substantiated with evidence or specific witness details. The court held that the right to bail is constitutionally protected...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 332 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Peter Njoroge Mungai; Defendant: Harun Mungai Wangare; Defendant: Harun Mungai Kangethe
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 52 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
- Outcome
- bail_granted_with_conditions
- Judges
- FM Mutuku
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Compelling Reasons, Witness Interference, Bond Conditions
- 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
Peter Njoroge Mungai
Defendant
Harun Mungai Wangare
Defendant
Harun Mungai Kangethe
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused persons should be granted bail pending trial.
- 2 Whether the prosecution has provided compelling reasons to deny bail.
- 3 Whether the accused are likely to interfere with witnesses if released on bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution did not provide sufficient evidence of compelling reasons to deny bail. The assertion that the accused might cause fear and anxiety among witnesses was not substantiated with evidence or specific witness details. The court held that the right to bail is constitutionally protected and, in the absence of compelling reasons, the accused are entitled to bail. The court therefore allowed the application for bail, subject to strict bond and cash bail terms, and cautioned the accused against any conduct that could interfere with witnesses or subvert justice.
Court Disposition
bail_granted_with_conditions
Orders
- Each accused person shall execute a bond of KES 1,000,000 with one surety of similar amount.
- Alternatively, each accused person may deposit cash bail of KES 500,000 with the Registrar of the court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 52 OF 2016
REPUBLIC……………………………………….….PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
PETER NJOROGE MUNGAI…..……….……....……1ST ACCUSED
HARUN MUNGAI WANGARE……….….……..........2ND ACCUSED
HARUN MUNGAI KANGETHE…….…….….......…..3RD ACCUSED
RULING
The accused persons herein have brought the application seeking to be admitted to bail pending the hearing and determination of this case. The applications are filed separately. The applications by Peter Njoroge Mungai, 1st accused, and Harun Mungai Wangare, 2nd accused, are both dated 14th November 2016. I did not see an application by Harun Mungai Kangethe, 3rd accused. However, Mrs. Omungala, advocate canvassed the application on behalf of the three accused persons.
In the attached respective affidavits, the 1st and 2nd accused persons state that they are Kenya Citizens and that they will abide by the terms and conditions of bail that this court may set; that they are law abiding citizens who are able to live peacefully with members of society.
Mrs. Omungala submitted that the three accused persons are related and live in Karinde Village; that they do not hold passports and therefore cannot abscond; that the prosecution did not advance any compelling reasons to persuade this court to deny the three accused persons bail and that the three accused persons will not interfere or intimidate the witnesses.
The application was opposed by the prosecution counsel Ms Nduati who submitted that there is no evidence that the accused persons have a fixed abode and if released they may interfere with witnesses. Counsel relied on the Replying Affidavit sworn by Police Constable Abdidek Shariff Mohamed.
I have considered the application and the replying affidavit. Indeed other than stating that there is a “possibility that the accused persons could inflict genuine fear and anxiety in the potential witnesses”, the prosecution has not advanced evidence to support this. Court was told that there are three key witnesses but was not given the names of the three. I am therefore not persuaded that there are compelling reasons to deny the accused persons bail. I will and do hereby allow the application for bail in respect of the three accused persons in the following terms and conditions:
(a) Each accused persons shall execute a bond of Kenya shillings one million (Kshs 1,000,000) with one surety of similar amount.
(b) In the alternative, each accused persons shall deposit with the Registrar of this court cash bail of Kenya shillings five hundred thousand (Kshs 500,000).
(c) The accused persons are cautioned against intimidating, interfering, threatening or doing anything towards the witnesses that might amount to subversion of justice.
(d) Failure to abide by these terms and conditions of bail shall amount to immediate cancellation of bail and immediate remand in custody until this matter is heard and determined.
Orders shall issue accordingly.
Dated, signed and delivered this 6th day of December 2016.
S. N. Mutuku
Judge