[2008] KEHC 3360 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant failed to demonstrate that his case met the principles for granting bail pending appeal. Specifically, the issues raised, while arguable, did not establish overwhelming chances of success in the appeal. The court considered the submissions and the lower court proceedings and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2008] KEHC 3360 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Stephen Muragu Kubai; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 207 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Bail Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Appeal, Burden of Proof, Alibi Evidence
- 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
Stephen Muragu Kubai
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Bail Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant should be granted bail pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the appeal has overwhelming chances of success.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant failed to demonstrate that his case met the principles for granting bail pending appeal. Specifically, the issues raised, while arguable, did not establish overwhelming chances of success in the appeal. The court considered the submissions and the lower court proceedings and concluded that the threshold for bail pending appeal was not met.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The chamber summons dated 2nd November 2007 is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NYERI
Criminal Appeal 207 of 2007
STEPHEN MURAGU KUBAI …………..……………………….. APPELLANT
Versus
REPUBLIC ………………………………………………………RESPONDENT
RULING
The Chamber Summons before court is dated 2nd November 2007. The Appellant by that application seeks that he be admitted to bail pending appeal. It is based on the ground that the Appellant’s pending appeal has overwhelming chances of success. To demonstrate this Counsel for the Appellant said that the prosecution failed to prove the case on the required criminal standards. He elaborated by saying that the Complainant whom the Appellant was alleged to have injured did not give evidence in the lower court. That the names of the Complainant in the lower court proceedings did not match the name in the charge sheet. Further that that charge sheet failed to reflect that the attack on the Complainant was by more than one person. In respect of the Clinical Officer the Appellant’s Counsel said that he did not give his qualifications and he failed to identify the weapon that injured the Complainant. In respect of alibi evidence the counsel argued that the court shifted the burden to the accused. The state opposed the application. In respect of the issues that were highlighted by the Appellant the state said that they showed the appeal to be arguable but not necessary to have overwhelming chances of success.
I have considered the application before court, the submissions made and the proceedings before the lower court. I find that the Appellant has not shown that his case falls within the principles for granting bail. Accordingly the chamber summons dated 2nd November 2007 is hereby dismissed.
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2008.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE