[2025] KEHC 10657 (KLR)
The court declined to review the bond terms for the 5th accused, finding that her inconsistent and inaccurate information regarding her nationality and identity, coupled with the lack of Kenyan identification documents and the holding of a Ugandan passport, created a significant flight risk. The court found the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 10657 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: David Sila Poltcarp; Defendant: Janet Kanini Mutisya; Defendant: Dominic Muundo Muindi; Defendant: Isaac Mutiso Muli; Defendant: Harriet Bangibasa alias Nalongo; Defendant: Harrison Mutua Munywoki alias Mchina
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Makueni
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E004 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond Review and Related Directions
- Outcome
- Application for review of bond terms for the 5th accused declined; bond terms for the 6th accused maintained; directions issued regarding welfare of minors.
- Judges
- TM Matheka
- Legal Topics
- Murder Charge, Bail and Bond, Flight Risk, Children Welfare, Surety Requirements
- 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
David Sila Poltcarp
Defendant
Janet Kanini Mutisya
Defendant
Dominic Muundo Muindi
Defendant
Isaac Mutiso Muli
Defendant
Harriet Bangibasa alias Nalongo
Defendant
Harrison Mutua Munywoki alias Mchina
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Bond Review and Related Directions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the bond terms for the 5th accused should be reviewed and reduced due to alleged hardship and family circumstances.
- 2 Whether the 6th accused should continue to enjoy bond terms despite previous allegations of absconding in another criminal case.
- 3 What measures should be taken to safeguard the welfare of the 5th accused's children during the pendency of the case.
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined to review the bond terms for the 5th accused, finding that her inconsistent and inaccurate information regarding her nationality and identity, coupled with the lack of Kenyan identification documents and the holding of a Ugandan passport, created a significant flight risk. The court found the existing bond terms reasonable in light of these circumstances and the seriousness of the offence. The court also directed that the welfare of the 5th accused's children be addressed by the Deputy Registrar and relevant children officers, in accordance with statutory obligations. For the 6th accused, the court accepted his explanation regarding the previous alleged absconding,...
Court Disposition
Application for review of bond terms for the 5th accused declined; bond terms for the 6th accused maintained; directions issued regarding welfare of minors.
Orders
- Application to review bond terms for the 5th accused is declined; bond remains at Kshs. 1,000,000 with two Kenyan sureties of similar amount.
- The 5th accused's passport to remain deposited in court; DCI to confirm status of any Kenyan passport at next mention date.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
Republic v Poltcarp & 5 others (Criminal Case E004 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 10657 (KLR) (16 July 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 10657 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Makueni
Criminal Case E004 of 2025
TM Matheka, J
July 16, 2025
Between
Republic
Prosecutor
and
David Sila Poltcarp
1st Accused
Janet Kanini Mutisya
2nd Accused
Dominic Muundo Muindi
3rd Accused
Isaac Mutiso Muli
4th Accused
Harriet Bangibasa alias Nalongo
5th Accused
Harrison Mutua Munywoki alias Mchina
6th Accused
Ruling
1. The accused persons are charged together with the others for murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of Penal Code – that on 15/1/2025 around 2. 00am, they murdered David Obenda Auka at Ngwata Area Kambua Location, Kambu Subcounty within Makueni County, with others not before court.
2. Accused 5 was on 3/6/2015 admitted to bond Kshs. 1,000,000 with 2 Kenyan Sureties each of similar amount among other conditions.This was based on the findings of 2nd pre-bail report after the court found that the 1st one was not entirely truthful. This is what I stated:Further to the ruling on bond for Accused 1 to Accused 4 - the only remaining issue was the bond terms for Accused 5. The pre-bail report was filed on 3/6/2025. I have carefully perused the report. The probation did not object to the release of the accused person on bond – on condition that her passport was deposited in court. The report states that she is Kenyan – but the accused holds a Uganda passport. She has no Kenyan identity despite the fact that the report states that her Ugandan family is unknown - the report states that she is born of a Kenyan father and an unknown Ugandan mother – There is no clarity as to how she became connected to her alleged Kenyan family. If she is as Kenyan as The Probation& Aftercare Services Report is indicating - why is she holding a Ugandan passport, and no Kenyan Identity documents? Does she have a Kenyan passport? When did she apply for the Kenyan ID?In the foregoing circumstances the 5th accused’s flight risk status remains uncertain.In the circumstances - the 5th accused is admitted to bond of Kshs. 1000,000 with 2 Kenyan sureties each of similar amount. The passport be deposited in court. The DCI is tasked to confirm at the next mention date that the accused person does not have Kenya passport as alleged.The following Order issued:1. Bond at Kshs. 1,000,000 with 2 Kenya sureties each of similar amount.2. The passport – whose particulars are on record be deposited in court pending the hearing and determination of this case.3. Any other passport be availed for the same purpose – DCI to confirm this at the next mention date – investigation officer to deal4. The accused to appear in court as and when required.
3. On 19/6/2025 counsel for 5th accused made an application for the bond terms to be reviewed to Kshs. 600,000. These were the proceedingsMr. Mulatya : I have an application for 5th accused - her people have been trying to secure bond terms there was problem with the chassis of the motor vehicle. Her children are still at home they cannot afford school fees – She seeks lenient bond terms – 2 sureties each of Ksh. 600,000 - she could be able to obtain sureties.Mr. Kazungu: I leave it to court
4. I considered the application for review of bond coming a few days after concerns about her bond status. By giving inaccurate information about herself, some of it outrightly false with the apparent collusion of the Probation Officer created a situation where the court formed the view that the accused was a fight risk. I am not persuaded that there is any reason to review the bond terms. The existing bond terms are reasonable in view of the circumstances of the accused person – taking into consideration the reasons given when the bond terms were given.The application is declined.Regarding her children, the Police had a obligation under the children Act no 29 of 2022 to inform the Children Officer within the jurisdiction of the plight of the children so that a P&C file can be opened to enable the safeguarding of their welfare.In the Circumstances, I direct that the matter be mentioned before the Deputy Registrar to follow up on the plight of the minors.
5. Regarding the 6th accused, I have perused the PACs Report. – it is revealed by the bail report that the accused has two criminal files at Makindu where he is charged with robbery with violence. That he absconded bond in Makindu CMCRC E273/2020 which had been set at Kshs. 1,000,000 and warrant of arrest was issued against him.It is noteworthy that when asked whether prosecution had any objection to bond in this matter with respect to this accused – there was no objection – yet there is said to be warrant of arrest against him.Before making the final orders here I asked the accused person to confirm whether or not there were warrants against him. In the presence of the Prosecutor, he told the court that he had not absconded but had developed a mental health issue and found himself walking along Mombasa Road, called his mother who came for him . That the issue was already settled and that his bond had been reinstated.Other than that, the family is willing to stand surety for him. The alleged fear that he may interfere with witnesses , by the brother to the deceased appears unfounded as the prosecution did not have any issue with his being released on bond.In the circumstances his bond terms remain as granted.Mention on 24th July 2025 before DR to follow up on.1. The Children of the 5th accused and the P&C file2. The issue of the 5th accused’s Kenyan passport.
DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED THIS 16TH JULY 2025MUMBUA T MATHEKAJUDGECA ChrispolAccusedMr. Kazungu for the State.Mr. Mutanya for the 5th accused