Automated Summary
Key Facts
The case involves three accused persons (Doris Wambui Iguku, Benson Musili Kelo, Simon Kariuki Ngachai) charged with murder under sections 203 and 204 of the Penal Code. The alleged offense occurred on December 19, 2021, in Kangemi Village, Nyeri County, resulting in the death of Erasmus Iguku Kinyua. The prosecution argues the accused are flight risks, citing arrests of the first and second accused in Machakos County (130 km from duty station) and the third accused in Lusoi Village after fleeing from Nyeri Town. The prosecution further claims the accused know the witnesses and may interfere with them, though no evidence of actual interference was presented. The accused denied fleeing and emphasized their fixed abodes and lack of prior bail violations.
Issues
The primary issue was whether the prosecution had established compelling reasons under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution to deny bail to the accused, who were charged with murder. The court considered factors like flight risk, witness interference, and adherence to bail conditions as outlined in the Bail and Bond Policy Guidelines and relevant case law.
Holdings
- That the accused persons shall not leave the jurisdiction of this court without permission of the court.
- That the accused persons be and are hereby released on bond of Kshs.1,000,000/= with one surety of a like amount.
- That upon release, the accused persons shall attend bi-monthly mentions before the Deputy Registrar pending disposal of this case.
Remedies
- The accused persons were released on a monetary bond of Kshs.1,000,000 with one surety of the same amount as determined by the court in its ruling dated 24th February 2022.
- The accused persons are required to attend bi-monthly court mentions before the Deputy Registrar until the case is disposed of, as specified in the court's ruling.
- The court ordered that the accused persons shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without obtaining permission from the court as part of the bail conditions.
Legal Principles
The court applied Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution, emphasizing that the prosecution bears the burden to demonstrate compelling reasons for denying bail. The ruling clarifies that an accused person has a constitutional right to bail unless the prosecution satisfies the court, on a balance of probabilities, that there are substantial grounds for believing they will interfere with witnesses, commit further offenses, or pose a flight risk.
Precedent Name
- Republic vs Fredrick Ole Leliman & 4 Others
- Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another vs R
- Republic vs Stephen Kinini Wang'ondu & 4 Others
- Ng'ang'a vs Republic
- Panju vs Republic
Cited Statute
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Penal Code
- Constitution of Kenya
Judge Name
F. MUCHEMI
Passage Text
- It follows that the right to bail is not absolute and where there are compelling reasons, that right may be restricted. Nevertheless, since the Constitution expressly confers the said right, it is upon the prosecution to show that there exists compelling reasons to deny an accused person bail.
- It is my finding that the accused persons herein ought to be accorded their right as granted by Article 49(1) of the Constitution. Consequently the following orders are made: That the accused persons be and are hereby released on bond of Kshs.1,000,000/= with one surety of a like amount.
- The prosecution further state that all the prosecution witnesses are known to the accused persons and thus if they are released, they pose a real or conceived threat to the witnesses. Further, the 3rd accused is a girlfriend to the 2nd accused and they lived together before the offence was committed and therefore if the 3rd accused is released on bail, there is a likelihood of interference before she gives her testimony.