https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11751
The court found that the application to file and serve the intended affidavit was made while the prosecution was still prosecuting the motion, and that fairness required allowing both sides an opportunity to properly place and respond to evidence in a matter implicating liberty. The court therefore granted the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 11751 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Sabrin Abrikadir Mohamed alias Anzal Omar Mohamed
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E060 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Interlocutory Ruling on Application for Leave to File Affidavit and Adjourn Hearing
- Outcome
- Application allowed; leave granted to file affidavit and proceed later the same day.
- Judges
- ["AM Muteti"]
- Legal Topics
- Right to Liberty, Fair Hearing, Technical Evidence Procedure, Adjournment, Revision Application
- 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
Sabrin Abrikadir Mohamed alias Anzal Omar Mohamed
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Interlocutory Ruling on Application for Leave to File Affidavit and Adjourn Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should permit the applicant to file an affidavit and serve documents before hearing the revision application
- 2 Whether reliance on documents from the bar could be allowed in a matter affecting personal liberty
- 3 How to balance fair hearing rights against procedural technicalities in a constitutional matter
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application to file and serve the intended affidavit was made while the prosecution was still prosecuting the motion, and that fairness required allowing both sides an opportunity to properly place and respond to evidence in a matter implicating liberty. The court therefore granted the requested indulgence and directed filing, service, and a fresh hearing later the same day.
Court Disposition
Application allowed; leave granted to file affidavit and proceed later the same day.
Orders
- Applicant to file and serve the intended affidavit by 1.15 pm on 30 June 2026.
- Respondent at liberty to file any response by 2.15 pm on 30 June 2026.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI** **CRIMINAL REVISION NO. E060 OF 2026** **REPUBLIC .......…………………………………………………….………...APPLICANT** **VERSUS** **SABRIN ABRIKADIR MOHAMED** **Alias ANZAL OMAR MOHAMED ......................................................RESPONDENT** **RULING** The prosecution Counsel began to prosecute its application for Revision but it turned out that he held documents that we wished to refer the court to from the bar. The court quickly pointed out to the applicants Counsel that the matter of an individual’s liberty under Article 29 of the constitution is so important for the court to allow evidence from the bar which seeks to limit the liberty of the Respondent. Counsel then applied for leave to file an affidavit to have the documents on record before the matter could proceed. Counsel sought for (2) two hours’ indulgence which was objected to by the Respondents Counsel citing the reason that the prosecution has all along had the documents and ought to have filed the same in good time before this hearing. The court has considered the request by Counsel for the applicant and the objection thereto. The issue at hand is so important for the court to simply cut through the motions of a hearing without giving each of the parties a fair opportunity to prosecute their case. Article 29 of the constitution guarantees every individual their freedom and that freedom should not be limited arbitrarily. The Court must do so only in the clearest of cases. The prosecutor was still on its feet prosecuting their case on the application for leave was therefore timeously made. The question that the court has to deal with is balance of the right to a fair hearing of the parties and the issue of technicalities on a matter of a weighty constitutional nature. I am inclined to grant the two bars sought by the applicant and since the hours of business of this court run up to 5.00pm the parties shall return in the course of the day be heard in the spirit of Article 25,50 and 159 of the constitution. The applicant shall ensure that the intended affidavit is filed and served before 1.15pm today and the respondent shall be at liberty to put any response thereto by 2.15pm. Hearing of the application shall proceed at 2.30pm It is so ordered. **RULING READ** and **DELIVERED** in open courtthis 30th day of June, 2026. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 1. **M. MUTETI** **JUDGE** **In the Presence of:** Mukwana for Applicant Mogere for State *Habiba -* Court Assistant