Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Judicial Review E002 of 2021 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | Republic v Director of Criminal Investigations, Regional Co-ordinator Garissa, Regional County Surveyor Garissa, Attorney General & Inspector General of Police Ex parte Mohamed Omar Ahmed, Ahmed G. Gabow & Ibrahim Mohamed Abdullahi |
| Date Delivered: | 20 Jan 2022 |
| Case Class: | Criminal |
| Court: | High Court at Garissa |
| Case Action: | Ruling |
| Judge(s): | Abida Ali-Aroni |
| Citation: | Republic v Director of Criminal Investigations, Regional Co-ordinator Garissa & 3 others Ex parte Mohamed Omar Ahmed & 2 others [2022] eKLR |
| Court Division: | Judicial Review |
| County: | Garissa |
| Case Outcome: | Application allowed |
| 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
AT GARISSA
JUDICIAL REVIEW NO. E002 OF 2021
REPUBLIC................................................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
DIRECTOR OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS,
REGIONAL CO-ORDINATOR GARISSA..................................1st RESPONDENT
THE REGIONAL COUNTY SURVEYOR GARISSA..............2ND RESPONDENT
THE HONOURABLE ATTORNEY GENERAL.......................3RD RESPONDENT
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE..............................4TH RESPONDENT
EXPARTE......................................................................MOHAMED OMAR AHMED
AHMED G. GABOW
IBRAHIM MOHAMED ABDULLAHI
RULING
1. The Ex parte Applicants moved the court on the 15th of February 2021 seeking for leave to file judicial review orders in the nature of certiorari to remove into the court and quash the decision of 1st and 2nd respondents contained in a letter dated 3rd February 2021 to carry out re-surveying of the boundary of Wasib Farm L.R No. 32234 and secondly, leave to apply for an order of prohibition to prohibit and restrain the 1st and 2nd respondents from carrying out the intended survey exercise as suggested 3rd February 2021 or at all. The Exparte Applicants also sought pending hearing and determination of the substantive motion for the leave so granted do operate as a stay.
2. Prayers b & c above were granted, pending was the last prayer for stay.
3. The response by the respondents failed to touch on prayer c despite the court’s order that the said prayer be argued inter partes. The responses have addressed the issue of re-survey.
4. The purpose of a stay order is to preserve status quo pending hearing and determination of the issue in question.
5. In my considered opinion no harm will be suffered by either side should this court stay the implementation of the decision of the 1st and 2nd respondents to carry out the intended survey pending hearing and determination of the issues raised in this suit.
6. Consequently, a stay of the implementation of the proposed survey works contemplated in the letter of 3rd of February 2021 be and is hereby granted pending hearing and determination of the suit.
DATED, DELIVERED AND SIGNED AT GARISSA THIS 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022.
.....................
ALI-ARONI
JUDGE
Please Wait. Searching ...