Please Wait. Searching ...
|Case Number:||Criminal Case 14 of 2020|
|Parties:||Republic v Emmanuel Kirui alias Kimonda|
|Date Delivered:||03 Dec 2020|
|Court:||High Court at Bomet|
|Citation:||Republic v Emmanuel Kirui  eKLR|
|Case Outcome:||Accused granted bail|
|Disclaimer:||The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information|
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 14 OF 2020
EMMANUEL KIRUI alias KIMONDA...............ACCUSED
1. The Accused Emmanuel Kirui alias Kimonda is charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code Cap 63 Laws of Kenya. The particulars of the offence are that on the 5th day of July, 2020 at Nyamarenda village Kaptebengwet location in Konoin Sub - County within Bomet County murdered Bernard Biegon.
2. The Accused took plea on 22nd October, 2020 and denied the charge. His counsel, Ms Chepkemoi promptly made an application for the Accused to be granted bond pending trial. Learned counsel submitted that the Accused was not a flight risk and would abide by any conditions imposed by the court. On his part, Mr Mureithi the learned prosecution counsel requested the court to order a social inquiry report.
3. When the matter came up for hearing on 25th November, 2020, Mr. Mureithi submitted that the prosecution had no objection to the Accused being granted bond if the pre- bail report was favourable to the Accused. On her part, defence counsel urged the court to grant reasonable bond terms.
4. I have considered the application, the respective submissions of counsel and the probation officer’s report dated 3rd November, 2020. The right to bail is provided by Article 49 of the Constitution. The only limitation to that right is the existence of compelling reasons. As is now settled practice, it is the duty of the State to demonstrate to the court the existence of compelling reasons. In this case, the prosecution did not oppose the application for bond. Instead, Counsel urged the court to consider the probation report.
5. The probation report indicates that the Accused was a law abiding and peace loving citizen prior to the charge he is facing. That he was a mason who undertook his business without conflict. According to the report, both his family and that of the deceased supported his release on bond. It is apparent therefore that the pre bail report was favourable to the Accused. I find that there is no compelling reason to deny the accused bond.
6. The Accused is granted bail on the following conditions:-
i. He shall pay cash bail of kshs. 300,000/= with one surety of similar amount.
ii. In the alternative, the accused shall execute a personal bond of kshs 300,000/= and provide 2 sureties of Kshs. 300,000/= each.
iii. He shall attend court whenever required and shall not impede the trial in any way.
7. Orders accordingly.
Ruling delivered, dated and signed this 3rd day of December, 2020.
Ruling delivered in the presence of the Accused, Defence Counsel Ms Chepkemoi, Mr. Mureithi for the DPP, and Kiprotich (Court Assistant).