https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8344

State v Nyamolo & another (Criminal Case E009 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 8344 (KLR) (12 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 8344 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Kisumu Criminal Case E009 of 2026 A Mabeya, J June 12, 2026 Between State Prosecution and Collins Ochieng Nyamolo 1st Accused Justus Okuku Owino 2nd Accused Ruling 1.Collins Ochieng Nyamolo And Justus Okuku Owino are charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code, Cap 63 Laws of Kenya. 2.It is alleged that on 24/2/2026 at around 0500hrs at Awach Sub-location in Nyakach Sub-County, jointly with others not before Court, they murdered Victor Odhiambo Otieno. They denied the charge and applied for bond. 3.The Court called for a pre-bail report which was filed on 26/5/2026. The reports dated 20/5/2025 are on record and the Court has considered them. According to Mr. Onsongo, Learned Counsel for the accused, there was no compelling reasons to warrant the accused being denied bond. 4.Ms. Kagali for the State submitted that it was clear from the reports that the family of the victim was opposed to the granting of bond. The reasons is that the family was apprehensive that the accused might interfere with the witnesses. That the wife of the deceased is traumatized. 5.In rejoinder, Mr. Onsongo indicated that, the issues raised by Ms. Kagali are matters that can only be dealt with if they are raised in an affidavit. That would give the accused an opportunity to test their veracity. In the present case however, there was no such affidavit. He urged the Court to proceed and grant the bond. 6.The Court has considered the application for bail, the opposition thereto and the Pre-bail reports on record. Under Article 49 of the Constitution of Kenya, every arrested person has the right to be released on bail or bond pending trial unless there are compelling reasons to deny it. The primary factor to be considered is the assurance that the accused will attend all scheduled trials. Even though however, where there is cogent evidence that there is a likelihood of an accused interfering with the prosecution witnesses, the Court may either deny bond or grant bond on terms. 7.In the present case, the Court allowed the parties to access the pre-bail reports on 3/6/2026. Although the prosecution saw the indication in the reports that the accused may interfere with the prosecution witnesses, no affidavit to that effect was ever filed. It is only if such allegations were made on oath that a Court can be able to gauge its veracity upon being tested in accordance with the law. 8.Since there was no affidavit(s) filed, I am unable to agree with the prosecution that the accused be denied bond. 9.Accordingly, I allow the application. The accused will be released on bond of Kshs.400,000/- each with a surety of a similar amount with a condition that they should keep clear of the prosecution witnesses.It is so ordered. DATED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026.A. MABEYA, FCI ArbJUDGE