[2015] KEHC 847 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution failed to demonstrate any compelling reasons to deny bail. The pre-bail report indicated that the accused have fixed abodes, there is no evidence of likely animosity from the community, and no evidence was provided that the accused would interfere with witnesses. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 847 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Philip Kavili Muthengi alias Mwiti; Defendant: Mercy Kianjia Kinyua; Defendant: Lydia Kaimenyi Kinyua
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 64 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail Application
- Outcome
- application for bail granted
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Compelling Reasons, Presumption of Innocence, Witness Interference
- 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
Philip Kavili Muthengi alias Mwiti
Defendant
Mercy Kianjia Kinyua
Defendant
Lydia Kaimenyi Kinyua
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bail Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused persons are entitled to bail pending trial under the Constitution.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny the accused persons bail.
- 3 Whether the accused are likely to interfere with witnesses or abscond.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution failed to demonstrate any compelling reasons to deny bail. The pre-bail report indicated that the accused have fixed abodes, there is no evidence of likely animosity from the community, and no evidence was provided that the accused would interfere with witnesses. The constitutional right to bail stands unless compelling reasons are shown, which was not the case here. Therefore, the accused are entitled to bail on specified terms.
Court Disposition
application for bail granted
Orders
- Each accused may be released on cash bail of KShs.50,000 plus one surety of KShs.300,000 each.
- If released, accused to ensure they attend court as required.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MERU
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 64 OF 2015
REPUBLIC............................................................PROSECUTOR
V E R S U S
PHILIP KAVILI MUTHENGI alias MWITI…............ 1ST ACCUSED
MERCY KIANJIA KINYUA ...................................... 2ND ACCUSED
LYDIA KAIMENYI KINYUA ...................................... 3RD ACCUSED
RULING
The three accused, namely; Philip Kavili Muthengi alias Mwiti, Mercy Kianjia Kinyua and Lydia Kaimeyi Kinyua are jointly charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 201as read with Section 204 of the PC. By the application dated 9/10/2015, they seek to be released on bond pending the hearing and determination of this case. All the three filed affidavits in support of the application. The grounds upon which they bring this application are that they have a constitutional right and be released on bond pending hearing of their case; that they are presumed innocent till proved otherwise; that they are willing to attend court as will be required of them; they have fixed places of abode being Kenyan citizens and are not a flight risk.
The application was opposed and CPL Evelyn Akoth filed an affidavit in reply in which she deponed that the accused are likely to interfere with witnesses who hail from the same locality as accused; that the offence occurred recently and the local community is likely to carry out revenge attacks on the accused.
I have considered the affidavits in support of the application and the reply in opposition. Though bond is a Constitutional right of an accused, the same is not absolute. Bond will be declined if there are compelling reasons to deny bond.
In this case, the court called for a pre bail report which it has also considered. The primary consideration in an application for bond is whether the accused will turn up for the trial of his/her case. Having read the pre-bail report, I find that the accused are said to have fixed abode; there is no obvious likely animosity from the community; and the prosecution did not avail any evidence to the effect that the accused are likely to interfere with the witnesses. For the above reasons, I find that the prosecution has not demonstrated that there are any compelling reasons to warrant this court to deny the accused persons bond. I therefore grant the application and order that each accused may be released on bond as follows:
Each accused may be released on cash bail of KShs.50,000/= plus one surety of Kshs.300,000/= each;
If released, accused to ensure they attend court as will be required of them;
They should be of good conduct and in default of any of the above, bond will be cancelled.
DATED, SIGNED, AND DELIVERED THIS 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2015.
R.P.V.WENDOH
JUDGE