Odundo v Director of Public Prosecution [2025] KEHC 10522 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Revision E008 of 2025
Judge
RN Nyakundi
The High Court declined to interfere with a trial court order cancelling bond, finding no basis to reinstate bond or cash bail, but directed priority hearing within 45 days.
The High Court partly allowed a review application, setting aside cancellation of bond for lack of evidence and restoring bond, while upholding admission of a late witness statement.
The court found that the prosecution failed to provide credible or tangible evidence that the accused interfered with the witnesses. The mere fact that the missing witnesses are related to the accused does not, without more, establish interference. The accused has consistently attended court and complied with bond terms. The prosecution's assertions were not supported by any direct proof of interference or contact between the accused and the witnesses. The court held that the prosecution did not demonstrate compelling reasons as required by law to justify cancellation of bond. Accordingly, th…
The High Court dismissed a revision application seeking cancellation of the respondent’s bond, holding that the trial court’s decision involved discretion and no irregularity was shown.
High Court in Nairobi certified a criminal revision application urgent and directed service, response, and the production of the lower court file for mention.
The High Court set aside a forfeiture of cash bail in a criminal revision, finding the trial court acted irregularly by proceeding without proper notice.
The High Court found that the trial magistrate failed to apply the correct objective test for recusal, namely whether a reasonable and fair-minded observer, knowing all the facts, would have a reasonable suspicion of bias. The magistrate cancelled the applicant's bond based on an affidavit that was not properly filed in the proceedings and which contained unsupported allegations. This procedural irregularity, coupled with the failure to consider the perception of impartiality from a neutral standpoint, created a reasonable basis for apprehension of bias. The court emphasized that the integrit…
The High Court in Bungoma dismissed an application to revise bond cancellation, holding that bail is constitutional but may be withdrawn where there is witness interference.
The court found that the trial magistrate properly exercised discretion in cancelling the applicant's bond based on compelling reasons, namely, credible evidence of interference with a minor witness. The evidence from the victim's mother, corroborated by the investigating officer, the grandmother, and the teacher, established a sufficient basis for the cancellation. The applicant failed to provide evidence to the contrary. The High Court, exercising its revisionary jurisdiction, found no error, illegality, or impropriety in the trial court's decision. The interests of the minor and the integr…