[2018] KEHC 9262 (KLR)
The court found that since the applicant was not implicated in the disappearance of the vehicle, and the actual suspects were already on trial, there was no justification for continued police custody of the vehicle. Photographs had already been taken as evidence, mitigating any risk to the prosecution's case. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 9262 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Titus Gichia Njeri; Respondent: D.C.I.O Kayole Division; Respondent: D.P.P.
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application 202 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
- Outcome
- application allowed with conditions
- Legal Topics
- Release of Exhibits, Preservation of 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
Titus Gichia Njeri
Applicant
D.C.I.O Kayole Division
Respondent
D.P.P.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the continued detention of the applicant's motor vehicle by the police is justified after photographs have been taken as evidence.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to the release of his motor vehicle pending the conclusion of the criminal trial.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that since the applicant was not implicated in the disappearance of the vehicle, and the actual suspects were already on trial, there was no justification for continued police custody of the vehicle. Photographs had already been taken as evidence, mitigating any risk to the prosecution's case. The applicant's willingness to comply with court conditions further reduced any potential prejudice to the respondents. Therefore, the vehicle should be released to the applicant, subject to conditions ensuring its availability for identification during the trial and prohibiting its disposal without police permission.
Court Disposition
application allowed with conditions
Orders
- Motor vehicle Reg. No. KBM 033B shall forthwith be released to the applicant.
- The applicant must produce the motor vehicle physically at the hearing of the trial on 26/7/2018 or any other time required for identification in the trial.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
MIS. CR. APPL. NO. 202 OF 2018
TITUS GICHIA NJERI.................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
D.C.I.O KAYOLE DIVISION............................1ST RESPONDENT
D.P.P.....................................................................2ND RESPONDENT
RULING.
1. I have heard the respective rival submissions by the Applicant and the Respondents. One thing is not disputed, that the motor vehicle belongs to the Applicant. It is also an undisputed fact that the Applicant had nothing to do with its disappearance. Indeed, the culpable persons are already on trial at Makadara Chief Magistrate’s Court in Cr. Case No. 866 of 2018.
2. I have heard, and it is also not disputed that photographs of the vehicle have already been taken. This is a precautionary measure that the investigating officer has taken in preserving the evidence in the criminal case. I take note that therefore, the continued holding of the vehicle by the police not only wastes the vehicle but also denies the Applicant a source of income.
3. The Applicant has submitted to any conditions that this court shall set. That alone, in addition to the fact that photographs have already been taken mitigates for the release of the vehicle. It buttresses the fact that no prejudice shall be suffered by the Respondents if the vehicle is released with some conditions. By extension, the pending criminal case stands not to be compromised. I accordingly make the following orders:
a. That motor vehicle Reg. No. KBM 033B shall forthwith be released to the Applicant.
b. The Applicant must produce the motor vehicle physically at the hearing of the trial on 26/7/2018 or any other time that he shall be required for purposes of identification of the same in the trial.
c. The Applicant shall not dispose of the said motor vehicle before the conclusion of the trial unless with the express written permission of the investigating officer, one Sergeant Luke Leley.
d. The orders be served upon the DCIO, Kayole and Sgt Leley for compliance.
e. I make no orders as to costs of this application.
DATED and DELIVERED this 4th JUNE, 2018.
G.W. NGENYE-MACHARIA
JUDGE