Kenya Case Law

Republic v Chebii

Republic v Chebii [2025] KEHC 10587 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Case E028 of 2022

Judge

RN Nyakundi

The court held that the Director of Public Prosecutions has the constitutional and statutory authority to discontinue criminal proceedings by entering a nolle prosequi, provided that judicial permission is sought and granted. In this case, the application was grounded in objective medical evidence confirming the accused's unfitness to plead due to Bipolar Mood disorder. The court found that the prosecution acted in good faith, and that continuing the proceedings would violate principles of natural justice and the accused's rights. The court applied the constitutional thresholds of public inte…

Source excerpt

• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Nolle Prosequi
• Fitness To Plead
• Mental Health In Criminal Law

Abdi v Republic

Abdi v Republic [2025] KEHC 10597 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Revision E134 of 2024

Judge

RC Rutto

The High Court dismissed a criminal revision application challenging withdrawal of charges, finding the trial court complied with prior directions and victim participation requirements.

• Withdrawal Of Charges
• Victim Participation
• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Revisionary Jurisdiction
• Withdrawal-of-charges
• Victim-participation

Juma v Director Of Criminal Investigations, Mtwapa & 5 others; Bindo (Interested Party)

Juma v Director Of Criminal Investigations, Mtwapa & 5 others; Bindo (Interested Party) [2025] KEHC 10449 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Constitutional Petition E010 of 2023

Judge

M Thande

The Court found that the Petitioner failed to provide cogent evidence or particularized details demonstrating that the Respondents violated his constitutional rights in the course of investigating and prosecuting him for forcible detainer. The police and prosecutorial authorities acted within their constitutional and statutory mandates, responding to a complaint by the Interested Party, who was the registered owner of the disputed land. The mere fact of arrest and prosecution, without evidence of malice, illegality, or abuse of process, does not amount to a violation of constitutional rights.…

Source excerpt

• Arrest And Detention
• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Right To Fair Trial
• Adverse Possession
• Abuse Of Process
• Land Ownership Disputes

Wafula v Director of Public Prosecutions; Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission & 2 others (Interested Parties)

Wafula v Director of Public Prosecutions; Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission & 2 others (Interested Parties) [2025] KESC 46 (KLR)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

Petition E045 of 2024

Judges

MK Koome, SC Wanjala, N Ndungu, I Lenaola, W Ouko

The Supreme Court held that it had jurisdiction under Article 163(4)(a) as the issues raised involved constitutional interpretation and application, specifically regarding prosecutorial discretion and fair trial rights. The Court found that the ODPP acted within its mandate in transposing the appellant from a prosecution witness to an accused person, as further investigations yielded new evidence justifying the change. There was no evidence of malice, arbitrariness, or violation of legitimate expectation, as the appellant had not testified before the trial court and was not simultaneously req…

Source excerpt

• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Fair Trial Rights
• Judicial Review
• Legitimate Expectation
• Abuse Of Process
• Defective Charge Sheet

Republic v Chief Magistrate, Wang’uru & another; Kinywa & another (Interested Parties); Moh (Ex parte Applicant)

Republic v Chief Magistrate, Wang’uru & another; Kinywa & another (Interested Parties); Moh (Ex parte Applicant) [2025] KEHC 9846 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review E009 of 2024

Judge

EM Muriithi

The High Court found that the decision to charge the applicant in Wang’uru Law Court criminal Case No. MCCR/E752 of 2024, while a substantially similar prosecution was ongoing in Milimani Law Courts on the same subject matter, constituted an abuse of the criminal process and a violation of the applicant’s fair trial rights. The court held that the DPP’s own admission that the facts in both cases were substantially similar, save for the complainants, and that allowing both to proceed would offend the doctrine of double jeopardy and amount to oppression, was determinative. The court emphasized…

Source excerpt

• Abuse Of Process
• Double Jeopardy
• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Fair Trial Rights
• Judicial Review
• Certiorari And Prohibition

Republic v Director of Public Prosecutions & 3 others; Otumba (Exparte Applicant); Rono & another (Interested Parties)

Republic v Director of Public Prosecutions & 3 others; Otumba (Exparte Applicant); Rono & another (Interested Parties) [2025] KEHC 8957 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E102 of 2024

Judge

RE Aburili

The High Court dismissed a judicial review challenge to a criminal prosecution, holding that the applicant had not shown abuse of process, illegality, or procedural unfairness.

• Judicial Review
• Abuse Of Process
• Prosecutorial Discretion
• False Pretence
• Forgery
• Impersonation Of Advocate

Karanja v Director of Public Prosecution & another

Karanja v Director of Public Prosecution & another [2025] KEHC 8973 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Constitutional Petition E103 of 2024

Judge

AB Mwamuye

The High Court dismissed a constitutional petition challenging an intended forgery prosecution, finding no proof of malice, arbitrariness, or rights violations.

• Malicious Prosecution
• Fair Trial Rights
• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Abuse Of Process
• Malicious-prosecution
• Prosecutorial-discretion

Republic v Director of Public Prosecutions & 3 others; Matoke (Exparte Applicant)

Republic v Director of Public Prosecutions & 3 others; Matoke (Exparte Applicant) [2025] KEHC 8650 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Judicial Review E010 of 2024

Judge

WA Okwany

The High Court dismissed a judicial review bid challenging police and prosecutorial investigations over a disputed sugar cane contract, finding no proven abuse of power.

• Judicial Review Remedies
• Abuse Of Power
• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Police Powers
• Civil Vs Criminal Liability
• Judicial-review

Barua v Inspector General of Police & 2 others

Barua v Inspector General of Police & 2 others [2025] KEHC 8234 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Petition E086 of 2024

Judge

EC Mwita

The court found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any violation of her constitutional rights or fundamental freedoms by the respondents in the investigation, arrest, charging, and prosecution for cybercrime offences. The police acted within their statutory mandate to investigate a complaint, and the DPP exercised constitutional discretion to prosecute based on evidence, including forensic analysis of the petitioner.s devices. The petitioner did not establish that the prosecution was actuated by malice, abuse of process, or was otherwise unconstitutional. The court emphasized that it i…

Source excerpt

• Right To Fair Trial
• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Abuse Of Process
• Cybercrime Offences
• Judicial Review
• Investigative Powers

Kavisa v Inspector General of Police & 5 others; Kihanda & another (Interested Parties)

Kavisa v Inspector General of Police & 5 others; Kihanda & another (Interested Parties) [2025] KEHC 8342 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Constitutional Petition E198 of 2021

Judge

EC Mwita

The court found that the prosecution of the petitioner was not supported by an objective evidential test and lacked a nexus between the alleged forged document and the petitioner. Initial investigations concluded that the petitioner had not committed any offence and recommended prosecution of the advocate, but this was inexplicably changed after the file was transferred to another police station. The respondents failed to justify the change in investigative conclusions or to dislodge the petitioner's explanation regarding the grant. The court held that the police and DPP did not comply with t…

Source excerpt

• Abuse Of Process
• Right To Fair Trial
• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Malicious Prosecution
• Administration Of Estates