[2019] KEHC 188 (KLR)
The court found that the original bail conditions, including the deposit of the applicant's passport and the requirement to seek leave before leaving the court's jurisdiction, were imposed to safeguard her appearance during trial, especially since she was released on cash bail without a surety. The applicant's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 188 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Sharon Khalai Marami
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 14 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Application for Release of Passport Pending Trial
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Bail Conditions, Passport Release, Flight Risk, Court Jurisdiction
- 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
Sharon Khalai Marami
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Application for Release of Passport Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant's passport deposited as a bail condition should be released to her during the pendency of the criminal case.
- 2 Whether the applicant's claim of inconvenience in seeking leave to travel justifies variation of bail terms.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the original bail conditions, including the deposit of the applicant's passport and the requirement to seek leave before leaving the court's jurisdiction, were imposed to safeguard her appearance during trial, especially since she was released on cash bail without a surety. The applicant's argument of inconvenience did not amount to a sufficient change in circumstances to warrant variation of the bail terms. The court held that releasing the passport without the leave requirement would undermine the purpose of the bail conditions and pose a risk of the applicant leaving the jurisdiction without the court's knowledge. Accordingly, the application for release of the...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 8.10.2019 for release of the applicant's passport is dismissed wholly.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 14 OF 2019
REPUBLIC....................................................DPP
VERSUS
SHARON KHALAI MARAMI........ACCUSED
RULING
The applicant (accused), has filed a notice of motion application dated 8. 10. 2019, seeking basically that her passport number [….] deposited in court be released to her. It was submitted by counsel for the applicant that the applicant has never absconded neither has been stated that she is a flight risk. Lastly, that the applicant has to keep travelling to earn her living and it would be cumbersome to have her keep coming to court each time she intends to travel.
The application was opposed by the state on several grounds. First, that the passport was one of the terms imposed by the court on bail in additional to the other term that she should not leave the jurisdiction of court without leave of the court. Also, that the applicant has not indicated where she travels to, when or for how long, not shown any document in support of this. Counsel went on that not one will be held to account since the applicant deposited cash bail and no surety.
I have considered the submissions of both sides. The applicant seeks the release (to her) of her passport ordered to be deposited in court on 25. 7.2019. I have considered the proceedings herein of the date. It is clear from the record that the prosecution made the application for deposit of the passport apparently out of years that she may leave the jurisdiction of the court. It was alleged that there was information that she works in Dubai. Of course the defence denied this stating that the applicant resides in Kenya. It is also clear that the court considered there submissions and made 2 orders in addition to the earlier orders made pursuant to the application’s bail application. The 2 orders were:-
(i) That the applicant do deposit her passport in court within 7 days of that date.
(ii) That the applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without leave of the court.
The above orders do not bar the applicant from travelling out of the jurisdiction of the court. Neither do they inhibit the life of the applicant. To my mind, the orders were meant only to safeguard her appearance in court during the pendency of this case, especially since she is out on cash bail with no surety.
Further, this application only seeks release of the said passport based on the fact that she is a frequent traveler and that it would be cumbersome for her to keep coming to court for leave each time she is to travel. The application does not address itself to the last order of the court that she must first obtain leave of the court in case she is to leave the jurisdiction of the court. If the passport is to be released in the manner in which the applicant seeks, there is no guarantee that she would not leave the jurisdiction of the court without the knowledge or leave of the court, a fact that would be in clear breach of the orders of this court. It is therefore not sufficient enough for the applicant to claim that it would be cumbersome to keep coming to court to obtain such leave.
I do not see any change in the circumstances herein from those that appertained as at the date on which the court made the additional orders on 26. 7.2019 for the said orders to be revised in any way. I consequently find no merit in this application dated 8. 10. 2019. I dismiss the same wholly.
D. O. OGEMBO
Judge
6. 11. 2019
COURT:
Ruling read out in open court in the presence of the accused Ms. Gichohi for the state and Mr. Baraka holding brief for Mr. Swaka for the accused.
D. O. OGEMBO
Judge
6. 11. 2019