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
Ndeto v Republic [2025] KEHC 9212 (KLR)
The High Court at Marsabit quashed Bonface Ndeto’s convictions for firearm and ammunition possession and acquitted him, finding possession was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Kalipa v Republic [2025] KEHC 5122 (KLR)
The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against convictions for unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition, and unlawful presence in Kenya.
Maina v Republic [2025] KEHC 5209 (KLR)
The High Court at Nyeri reviewed and reduced sentences imposed on a guilty-pleading first offender, finding the original terms excessive in the circumstances.
Siareng v Republic [2025] KEHC 1217 (KLR)
The High Court at Kabarnet dismissed an application to reduce a 7-year firearm sentence, finding no basis to interfere with the trial court’s discretion.
Eriodo v Republic [2025] KEHC 1236 (KLR)
The High Court, having already heard and determined the applicant's appeal challenging his conviction and sentence, is functus officio and lacks the jurisdiction to review its own judgment and sentence unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated, which the applicant failed to do.
Source excerpt
Muhumed v Republic [2024] KEHC 4359 (KLR)
The High Court found that while there was no formal confession by the appellant, his voluntary provision of information leading to the recovery of ammunition and a hand grenade constituted an admission, not a confession. This admission, corroborated by circumstantial evidence and the testimony of several prosecution witnesses, was sufficient to establish possession beyond reasonable doubt. The court distinguished between admissions and confessions, holding that the procedural requirements for confessions under the Evidence Act did not apply. The appellant's alibi and claims of evidence planti…
Source excerpt
Mamo & 3 others v Republic [2024] KEHC 3579 (KLR)
The High Court quashed convictions for firearm and ammunition possession, finding the prosecution had not proved actual or constructive possession beyond reasonable doubt.
Lomala v Republic [2023] KEHC 26383 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant stole ammunition entrusted to him by virtue of his military duties. The doctrine of recent possession applied, as the appellant was found in possession of 750 rounds of ammunition less than 48 hours after it was reported missing, and he failed to provide a reasonable explanation for his possession. The evidence from multiple witnesses established the chain of custody and the circumstances under which the ammunition went missing and was later recovered from the appellant. The court also found that the convic…
Source excerpt
Mamo & 2 others v Republic [2023] KEHC 23101 (KLR)
The High Court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the 1st appellant was found in possession of the firearm and ammunition, as there was a material contradiction between the police and expert evidence regarding the magazine's capacity and the number of rounds allegedly recovered. This discrepancy undermined the credibility of the prosecution witnesses and created doubt as to whether the 1st appellant was actually found with the firearm and ammunition. Regarding the 2nd and 3rd appellants, the court held that there was no evidence that the items allegedly fo…
Source excerpt
Said & another v Republic [2023] KEHC 22273 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution failed to disprove the appellant's alibi and did not provide critical evidence such as the Occurrence Book, call data for the appellant's phones, or CCTV footage to establish the circumstances of arrest and possession of the alleged exhibits. The evidence presented by the prosecution was inconsistent and uncorroborated, particularly regarding the date and circumstances of arrest and recovery of the items. The trial court failed to properly consider the defence of alibi, and the prosecution did not meet the standard of proof required in criminal cases. In l…
Source excerpt
Explore more
