[2016] KEHC 5602 (KLR)
The court found that there were no compelling reasons to deny the accused bail. The only ground advanced by the prosecution was that the accused had threatened some witnesses, but those witnesses had already testified. The remaining witnesses had not been threatened. The court also considered the inordinate delay in...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 5602 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Simon Kariuki Mwangi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Murang'a
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 29 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Bail Application Pending Trial
- Outcome
- bail granted
- Judges
- DW Mbuteti
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Compelling Reasons, Constitutional Rights, Pretrial Detention
- 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
Simon Kariuki Mwangi
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Bail Application Pending Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010.
- 2 Whether there exist compelling reasons to deny the accused bail.
- 3 Whether the alleged threats to witnesses constitute a compelling reason to deny bail.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there were no compelling reasons to deny the accused bail. The only ground advanced by the prosecution was that the accused had threatened some witnesses, but those witnesses had already testified. The remaining witnesses had not been threatened. The court also considered the inordinate delay in concluding the trial and the fact that the accused had been in custody for about seven years. In light of the constitutional right to bail and the absence of compelling reasons, the court granted the accused bail on reasonable terms.
Court Disposition
bail granted
Orders
- The accused shall be admitted to bail upon his own cognizance in the sum of KShs 300,000 and one surety in like sum.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MURANG’A
CRIMINAL CASE NO 29 OF 2012
(FORMERLY NYERI HC CRIMINAL CASE NO 8 OF 2010)
REPUBLIC.………………………………..……………...PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
SIMON KARIUKI MWANGI …………………………………..ACCUSED
R U L I N G
1. The Accused herein, Simon Kariuki Mwangi, is charged with murder contrary to sections 203and204 of the Penal Code. It is alleged in the information dated 15/03/2010 that on 05/06/2009 at Chui in Gitugi Location of Mathioya District in Central Province, jointly with others not before the court, he murdered Joseph Ngeita.
2. The Accused’s plea was taken at the High Court, Nyeri on 07/04/2010. The case was subsequently transferred to this court before his trial started. The trial commenced on 29/05/2014 before my predecessor, Ngaah, J; six prosecution witnesses testified. Four additional prosecution witnesses have testified before me. The prosecution say they have three more witnesses to call. On 26/10/2015 the court warned that it would not grant any further adjournment upon the ground of non-attendance of prosecution witnesses. The case was scheduled for further hearing on 16/03/2016, but on that date the Judge was on leave. A date for further hearing will be given shortly.
3. In the meantime the Accused has applied by notice of motion dated 25/01/2016 to be admitted to bail pending conclusion of his trial. The Republic has opposed the application upon the ground that the Accused had threatened some witnesses. But it turns out that the witnesses that he was alleged to have threatened have all testified. The remaining witnesses are two doctors and a police officer. It has not been alleged that the Accused has threatened these remaining prosecution witnesses.
4. I also note that trial of the Accused has taken an inordinately long time to conclude, and he has been in custody since the year 2009, a period of about seven (7) years now!
5. Bail pending trial is now a constitutional right for all offences, and will be denied only for compelling reason. Any condition for such bail, again by constitutional edict, must be reasonable. See Article 49 (1) (h) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010.
6. In the circumstances of this case I find no compelling reason to deny the Accused bail. He shall be admitted to bail upon his own cognizance in the sum of KShs 300,000/00 and one surety in like sum. It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AT MURANG’A THIS 21ST DAY OF APRIL 2016
H P G WAWERU
JUDGE
DELIVERED AT MURANG’A THIS 22ND DAY OF APRIL 2016