Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Farah v Republic [2025] KECA 255 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal upheld Zainab Abdi Farah’s conviction for trafficking narcotic drugs, finding the drugs were lawfully recovered from her bedroom and the sentence was lawful.
Mutunga v Republic [2025] KEHC 16705 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution proved the offence of robbery with violence beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant's evidence that the appellant was armed with a knife and inflicted injuries was corroborated by medical evidence. Although there was inconsistency regarding the number of assailants, the law requires only one element of section 296(2) to be proved, and the use of a dangerous weapon and actual violence were established. The absence of an inventory for recovered items was not fatal, as the items were produced in court and identified by witnesses. The identification parade wa…
Source excerpt
Mutunga v Republic [2025] KEHC 2063 (KLR)
The conviction for robbery with violence was upheld because the prosecution proved two of the disjunctive elements required by section 296(2) of the Penal Code: that the offender was armed with a dangerous weapon (a knife) during the robbery and that the offender used personal violence (inflicting a cut wound) to the victim. The court, however, set aside the mandatory life sentence following recent Supreme Court and Court of Appeal decisions that rendered the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence unconstitutional, substituting it with a term of fifteen years imprisonment.
Source excerpt
Republic v Barasa [2025] KEHC 311 (KLR)
The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused caused the death of the deceased, as the circumstantial evidence presented did not inexorably or irresistibly point to his guilt.
Source excerpt
Sora v Republic [2024] KEHC 11477 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant, having absconded and deliberately failed to attend his trial, waived his constitutional right to be present, and the trial court was justified in proceeding in his absence. The evidence established that the appellant was found in possession and control of a vehicle and trailer containing 89 bales (445 kg) of cannabis, and he signed all relevant inventory and seizure documents. The procedures under section 74A were substantially complied with, and no prejudice was shown. The prosecution proved the offence of trafficking in narcotic drugs beyond reasonable do…
Source excerpt
Kimathi v Republic [2024] KEHC 6582 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence established that the appellant, a clerical officer at Nanyuki Law Courts, requested and received a bribe of Kshs. 10,000 from the complainant to facilitate the verification of a title deed. The complainant's testimony was corroborated by forensic evidence showing APQ powder on the appellant's hands and the treated money, as well as supporting testimony from other prosecution witnesses. The court held that any contradictions in the prosecution's case were minor and did not go to the root of the matter. T…
Source excerpt
Adanna v Republic [2024] KEHC 4712 (KLR)
The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against a narcotics trafficking conviction and sentence, finding the prosecution proved its case and the sentence lawful.
Republic & 2 others v Njeru & 2 others [2023] KEHC 26925 (KLR)
The High Court at Embu allowed a criminal appeal, set aside an acquittal, and convicted the respondent of rape and abuse of position of authority.
Republic v Gatwiri [2023] KEMC 110 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused due to significant doubts regarding the handling and processing of the key exhibit. The exhibit memo form was prepared 21 days after the arrest by an officer who was not the initial recipient of the seized substance, contravening section 167 of the Evidence Act, which requires contemporaneous or prompt documentation. This delay undermined the probative value of the exhibit and the subsequent analyst report, as the condition of the seized liquid could have changed due to fermentation and oxidation.…
Source excerpt
Muindi & another v Republic [2023] KEHC 24955 (KLR)
The High Court allowed a consolidated criminal appeal over wildlife offences, finding serious gaps in the chain of custody and exhibit handling.
Explore more
