[2022] KEHC 2471 (KLR)
The court found that there were no compelling reasons presented to justify denial of bail to the accused. The right to bail is constitutionally guaranteed unless the prosecution demonstrates compelling reasons to the contrary. The court emphasized that the purpose of bail is to secure the accused's attendance at...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2471 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Sarah Watiri Kamau
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kiambu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E045 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
- Outcome
- bail_granted_with_conditions
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Compelling Reasons, Conditions of Bail
- 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
Respondent
Sarah Watiri Kamau
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution.
- 2 Whether there are compelling reasons to deny the accused bail.
- 3 What conditions, if any, should be attached to the grant of bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there were no compelling reasons presented to justify denial of bail to the accused. The right to bail is constitutionally guaranteed unless the prosecution demonstrates compelling reasons to the contrary. The court emphasized that the purpose of bail is to secure the accused's attendance at trial and that conditions may be imposed to mitigate risks such as interference with witnesses or absconding. The court accepted the accused's undertaking to relocate and not contact witnesses, and accordingly granted bail with specific conditions to ensure the integrity of the trial process.
Court Disposition
bail_granted_with_conditions
Orders
- The accused, Sarah Watiri Kamau, shall be released on a bond of Kshs. 1,000,000 with two sureties of similar amount.
- The accused must relocate from Gikambura Location of Kikuyu Sub-County within Kiambu County until the conclusion of the trial.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
34 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KIAMBU
CRIMINAL CASE NO. E045 OF 2021
REPUBLIC.......................................................................................PROSECUTOR
-VERSUS-
SARAH WATIRI KAMAU......................................................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. SARAH WATIRI KAMAU pleaded not guilty to the offence of murder. Trial date of her case is yet to be set. She applied she be released on bail/bond pending her trial.
2. The accused’s mother swore an affidavit in support of the accused’s bail application. The mother confirmed that the accused will attend hearing of her trial if released on bail. The mother confirmed she will procure sureties to guarantee accused’s attendance for her trial. Further, the accused confirmed she will re-locate from where the alleged offence occurred and will reside at her ancestral home, Natu village in Kikuyu, with the mother.
3. Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitutionprovides that an arrested person has right to be released on bail/bond on reasonable terms, pending trial or charge, unless there are compelling reasons.
4. The prosecution requested that bail be on condition that the accused desists from contacting the prosecution witnesses and that she does re-locate from Gikambura area.
5. The purpose of granting bail/bond is to ensure an accused person does attend trial. This was discussed in the casePETER KINYANJUI WAINAINA VS. REPUBLIC (2021) eKLR,thus:-
“The court in theMAURICE AMUGUMBIcase (supra) observed that:
‘The ultimate purpose of bail is to ensure that the accused person will attend trial. Obviously, the more severe the likely punishment for the offence charged, the more likely that an accused person may be tempted to abscond to avoid the eventuality of punishment. Therefore,
in as much as the court must pay attention to the charges facing an accused person, it must be careful to give effect to the right to bail while determining what conditions to impose. If that does not happen, the terms imposed may well turn out to be effectively a denial of the right to bail.’”
6. There are no compelling reasons brought to the attention of this Court why bail/bond should not be granted.
7. Accordingly, this Court grants the following orders:-
(a) Sarah Watiri Kamau shall be released pending her trial on a bond of Kshs.1 million with two sureties of similar amount.
(b) The accused is granted the above bond on condition she re-locates from Gikambura Location of Kikuyu Sub-County within Kiambu County until conclusion of this trial.
(c) The accused is also released on bond on condition she does not contact any of the prosecution’s witnesses pending this trial.
8. At the reading of this Ruling a trial date shall be fixed.
RULING DATED AND DELIVERED AT KIAMBU THIS 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Coram:
Court Assistant: Mourice
Accused: SARAH WATIRI KAMAU: - Present
For accused: - Ms. Muthoni Nyoguto
For DPP: Mr. Kasyoka and Mr. Benjamin
COURT
RULINGdelivered virtually.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE