[2025] KEHC 455 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's application to transfer the case to Kisumu High Court was without merit because the issue of venue had already been fully canvassed and determined by Justice Aburili after hearing all parties. The prosecution's current application was viewed as an attempt at forum shopping,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 455 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic of Kenya; Defendant: Victor Ouma Okoth alias Govins; Defendant: Duncan Ochieng Obong’o alias Otuch
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E003 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Application to Transfer Venue
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DK Kemei
- Legal Topics
- Transfer of Venue, Forum Shopping, Pre Bail Reports, Witness Protection, Jurisdiction, Trial Procedure
- 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 of Kenya
Applicant
Victor Ouma Okoth alias Govins
Defendant
Duncan Ochieng Obong’o alias Otuch
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Application to Transfer Venue
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution's application to transfer the case from Siaya High Court to Kisumu High Court is merited.
- 2 Whether the prior order by Justice Aburili transferring the case to Siaya High Court should be reviewed or set aside.
- 3 Whether the convenience and safety of witnesses and accused persons justify a change of venue.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's application to transfer the case to Kisumu High Court was without merit because the issue of venue had already been fully canvassed and determined by Justice Aburili after hearing all parties. The prosecution's current application was viewed as an attempt at forum shopping, lacking any new or compelling grounds that would justify revisiting or reviewing the earlier order. The court emphasized that the proper procedure for challenging the previous order would be to file a formal application for review before the original court, not to seek a different outcome from another court. Additionally, the court held that the convenience of witnesses and the...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The prosecution's application to transfer the case to Kisumu High Court is dismissed.
- Parties are directed to proceed with the pre-trial conference in Siaya High Court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
State v Okoth alias Govins & another (Criminal Case E003 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 455 (KLR) (27 January 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 455 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Siaya
Criminal Case E003 of 2025
DK Kemei, J
January 27, 2025
Between
State
Prosecution
and
Victor Ouma Okoth alias Govins
1st Accused
Duncan Ochieng Obong’o alias Otuch
2nd Accused
Ruling
1. Learned counsels Mr. Okango, Mr Soita and M/s Muema for the prosecution have urged this court to transfer this matter to Kisumu High Court for trial and determination. Learned counsels maintained that the learned Judge at Kisumu High Court who took plea had made orders suo motto transferring this case to this court. It was further contended that there is a related matter at Kakamega High Court where an accused had offered to enter into a plea bargain whereby he is expected to be a prosecution witness in this matter. It was further contended that Kisumu will be a central place for their large number of witnesses, some of whom are under witness protection.
2. Miss Odipo for both accused submitted that the Judge at Kisumu had made orders upon listening to all the parties. She was of the view that the prosecution should file a formal application for review of the orders made in Kisumu. Learned counsel added that the pre-bail report is yet to be filed so as to establish the issue of safety of the accused persons.
3. I have given due consideration to the brief submissions of learned counsels. It is not in dispute that the parties herein did make representations before Hon. Justice Aburili on 18/12/2024. It is also not in dispute that the learned Judge duly considered the rival arguments and came up with a considered and erudite ruling in which she ordered the matter transferred to this court. It is also not in dispute that the issues raised by the prosecution herein were substantially determined by Justice Aburili. It is also not in dispute that the present application appears to be a disguise at seeking for review of the orders made on 18/12/2024.
4. As the issues were duly dealt with by Aburili J in her ruling dated 18/12/2024, i find the present application by the prosecution is akin to forum shopping. It was rather strange for the prosecution to claim that the Judge at Kisumu High Court had made the order suo motto when the true position is that all parties duly presented their views before the order was made. If the prosecution is uncomfortable with the orders of Aburili J and have now come across new matters which had not been placed before the court in Kisumu, then they ought to file an application for review of the orders at Kisumu High Court. It is noted that the offence was committed in Siaya and hence the matter should be heard in Siaya High Court. The issue of convenience of witnesses some whom are said to be based in Kisumu should not be of major concern since Siaya and Kisumu counties border each other and that the travel distance is not an issue at all. As regards the issue of safety of the accused persons, the pre-bail report is yet to be filed by the County Probation Officer and that in any case the issue of safety affects only matters to do with the release of accused on bail pending trial and not about the place of trial.
5. In view of the foregoing observations, i find that the prosecution’s application lacks merit. The same is dismissed. Parties are now directed to proceed with the pre-trial conference so that the matter can begin in earnest for hearing.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT SIAYA THIS 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025D. KEMEIJUDGEIn the presenceVictor Ouma Okoth…………1st accusedDuncan Ochieng……………2nd accusedM/s Odipo………………..for accusedMiss Muema…for Prosecution…………………………………Mr. Onyango ……… Watching brief for family of deceasedOgendo……………………..Court Assistant