[2013] KEHC 2751 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's right to bail under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution was not opposed by the State and that the medical evidence demonstrated an urgent need for medical attention. There were no compelling reasons presented to deny bail. The court therefore exercised its discretion to grant...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 2751 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Timothy Kiboga Chochi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 94 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
- Outcome
- Application for bail allowed; applicant released on bond with conditions.
- Legal Topics
- Bail Pending Trial, Right to Bail, Compelling Reasons, Medical Grounds, Bond Conditions
- 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
Timothy Kiboga Chochi
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Bail Application Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to bail pending trial under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution.
- 2 Whether the applicant's medical condition constitutes a compelling reason for release on bail.
- 3 What conditions should be imposed to ensure the applicant's attendance at trial.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's right to bail under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution was not opposed by the State and that the medical evidence demonstrated an urgent need for medical attention. There were no compelling reasons presented to deny bail. The court therefore exercised its discretion to grant bail, subject to conditions designed to ensure the applicant's attendance at trial and prevent interference with witnesses.
Court Disposition
Application for bail allowed; applicant released on bond with conditions.
Orders
- The applicant shall execute a personal bond of KES 1,000,000 with two sureties of KES 1,000,000 each.
- The applicant shall not interfere with prosecution witnesses; any such interference will lead to automatic cancellation of bond.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Criminal Case 94 of 2011 [if gte mso 9]><xml>
14. 00
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-US X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; line-height:115%; font-size:11. 0pt;"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]
TIMOTHY KIBOGA CHOCHI.…………….........……….. APPLICANT
V
REPUBLIC…….…………………………………….RESPONDENT
RULING
The accused Timothy Kiboga Chochi is facing trial for the murder of one Jesse Mbugua Karanja which offence is stated to have been committed on the 28th November 2011 at Pipeline Estate in Nairobi area within Nairobi County. The trial commenced on 19th March 2012 and so far three prosecution witnesses have testified.
The accused has now applied to this court to be released on bail. His application is dated 18th March 2013 and is based on Article 49 (1)(h) of the Constitution which provides for the right to bail; and, on a medical report on his current health status.
The applicant deposes in his affidavit sworn on 18th March 2013 that he underwent surgery in the year 2001 and that he now requires another surgery to remove a tumor in his abdomen. His averment is supported by a medical report by one Dr. B. Waititu a Surgeon at the Kenyatta National Hospital.
The state initially opposed the application and filed a Replying Affidavit sworn on 2nd May 2013 by one No. 39114 PC Maurice Mukara. However, on the same day during the hearing, Mr. Okeyo for the State appears to have changed his mind and conceded the application. He informed the court that the state no longer wished to oppose the application on humanitarian and medical grounds. He only asked the court to impose conditions that would ensure that the accused attended trial.
UnderArticle 49(1) h of the Constitution an accused person has a right to bail or bond pending trial. Such right however is qualified and where there are compelling reasons the court would normally not release an accused on bail.
I have considered the application. The same is not opposed by the State. I am satisfied, on the basis of the medical records presented, that the applicant is indeed in urgent need of medical attention.
I therefore allow the application and release the accused on the following terms:-
(i)He shall execute a personal bond of One million shillings (Kshs.1,000,000/-) with two sureties of KShs.1,000,000/- each.
(ii)He shall not interfere with the prosecution witnesses and any such interference shall lead to the automatic cancellation of this bond.
(iii)He shall attend court for the mention of his case once every month. The first of such mentions shall be on 25th June, 2013.
It is so ordered.
Ruling delivered, dated and signed at Nairobi this 21stday of May , 2013
R. LAGAT - KORIR
JUDGE
In the presence of:
……………………………….:Court clerk
Timothy Kibocha Chochi Applicant
……………………………...:For the accused/applicant
……………………………...:For the state/respondent