[2015] KEHC 3928 (KLR)
Although the Constitution guarantees the right to bail, the court retains discretion to deny bail where compelling reasons exist. In this case, credible information was presented that witnesses had been intimidated, specifically that a key witness had received threats related to her testimony. The risk of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 3928 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Samuel Mboi Paul; Defendant: Mwanzia Paul
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Voi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Murder Case 14 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
- Outcome
- bail application denied
- Legal Topics
- Bail Application, Murder Charge, Witness Intimidation
- 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
Samuel Mboi Paul
Defendant
Mwanzia Paul
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Bail Application / Ruling on Bail Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused persons are entitled to bail pending trial for a murder charge.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny bail, specifically the risk of witness intimidation.
Ratio Decidendi
Although the Constitution guarantees the right to bail, the court retains discretion to deny bail where compelling reasons exist. In this case, credible information was presented that witnesses had been intimidated, specifically that a key witness had received threats related to her testimony. The risk of interference with witnesses constitutes a compelling reason to deny bail, as it threatens the integrity of the criminal justice process. The court found that, despite positive probation reports and lack of opposition from the deceased's family, the potential for witness intimidation outweighed the presumption in favour of bail. Therefore, the application for bail was rejected, with...
Court Disposition
bail application denied
Orders
- The accused's application for bail is rejected.
- The accused may make a fresh application for bail after the prosecution has closed its case.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
40 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
HIGH COURT AT VOI
MURDER CASE NO 14 OF 2014
REPUBLIC ……………..………………………….PROSECUTOR
=VERSUS=
SAMUEL MBOI PAUL………....…………………1st ACCUSED
MWANZIA PAUL………………………………..2nd ACCUSED
RULING ON BAIL APPLICATION
The two accused face a murder charge contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code Cap 63.
The accused trial commenced on 10th June 2015. After the evidence of three prosecutions witnesses had been adduce the learned counsel for the accused Mr. Mwanyumba applied for the accused to be released on bail.
It was submitted thateven though offence they face is bailable both accused had been in custody since their apprehension over this offence in June 2014.
Accused learned counsel submitted that the court was knowledgeable of the family background of the accused having received the evidence of the accused father.
Both accused are brothers, 2nd accused being older than the 1st accused. PW2 Paul Ngei Munyao is their father.
I need to state that the court received probation reports on both accused, which are dated 25th July 2014. Those report show that the accused just like many other young men of their area, Nakrutoin Taveta, dropped out of school at very young age to go to join in the business of quarry. Both accused dropped out of primary school to engage in that business.
The probation report shows that the accused family resides on a two acre piece of land at Nakruto but do not hold title for that land. The land is yet to be adjudicated. They carry out subsistence farming thereon.
The accused family is acquainted with the family of the deceased. According to the probation report the deceased family had come to terms with the death of the deceased and were not a versed to the release of the accused on bail.
There is no doubt that the information provided as seen above is all positive to the granting of the accused bail. The prosecution did not oppose the application, but learned counsel Mr. Sirima in making that concession stated that the court should warn PW2 Paul Ngei, the father of the accused not to intimidate witnesses in this case. Indeed learned counsel had earlier made a request, off the court record, that the court do ensure to hear the evidence of PW3, Rose Joyce Chawucha, because she was receiving threat related to the evidence she was due to adduce before court.
COURT’S ANALYSIS
The guiding provision on the court’s consideration of an application for bail is to be found in Article 49 (1) (h) of the Constitution of Kenya, which provides:
“An arrested person has the right -
(a)...................................
(h) to be released on bond or bail, on reasonable conditions, pending a charge or trial, unless there are compelling reasons not to be released”.
A case that properly captures those provisions in the Constitution is JOB KENYANYA MUSONI V REPUBLIC (2012) eKLRdecided by Justice C. W. Githuawhen she stated thus:
“ I wish to conclude by borrowing the words of J. Ibrahim (as he then was) when he stated in Republic -Vs- Danson Mgunya & Another [2010] eKLR that -
“Liberty is precious and no one's liberty should be denied without lawful reasons and in accordance with the law. Liberty should not be taken for granted...................”. “
I am conscious of those provisions of the right of an accused person to be released on bail. I have also taken into consideration the positive remarks made by the probation officer.
As much as there is that right, the granting of bail is always at the discretion of the judge. In exercising that discretion the information that some witnesses have been intimidated not to testify in this case has laid heavily on my mind as I considered this application. It is an accepted principle in law that bail will not be granted where there is a possibility an accused being an agent of undermining the integrity of the criminal justice system, for example, intimidation of witnesses, (see the judiciary Bail Bond Policy Guidelines).
It is for that reason that I reject the bail application by the accused. Liberty is hereby granted to the accused to make fresh application for bail, but only after the prosecution has closed its case.
It is so ordered.
Dated and delivered in Voi on 11th day of June 2015
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Coram
Before Justice Mary Kasango
C/A Kavuku
For DPP:
For Accused:
Ruling read in their presence/absence in open court.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE