Case Metadata |
|
Case Number: | Criminal Case E038 of 2021 |
---|---|
Parties: | Director of Public Prosecutions v Tabitha Njeri Maina & Praxides Naliaka Musheshi |
Date Delivered: | 24 Feb 2022 |
Case Class: | Criminal |
Court: | High Court at Kitui |
Case Action: | |
Judge(s): | George Vincent Odunga |
Citation: | Director of Public Prosecutions v Tabitha Njeri Maina & another [2022] eKLR |
Advocates: | Mr Wairegi for the 1st accused. Ms Wanjiru Njihia for the 2nd accused Mr Wathome for the family Mr Ngetich for the State |
Court Division: | Criminal |
County: | Kitui |
Advocates: | Mr Wairegi for the 1st accused. Ms Wanjiru Njihia for the 2nd accused Mr Wathome for the family Mr Ngetich for the State |
History Advocates: | Both Parties Represented |
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 KITUI
(Coram: Odunga, J)
CRIMINAL CASE NO. E038 OF 2021
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS....................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
TABITHA NJERI MAINA.......................................................................1ST RESPONDENT
PRAXIDES NALIAKA MUSHESHI......................................................2ND RESPONDENT
ORDER
1. I have considered the reasons advanced by the Prosecution and the Victim’s family for opposing the release of the accused person’s on bond pending their trial. According to them they have valid compelling reasons that justify the denial of the accused’s release on bond.
2. The accused persons, on their part contend that the reasons advanced by the prosecution do not amount to compelling reasons to warrant their denial of enjoyment of their constitutional right to bail.
3. Without determining the merits of the respective cases, it is my view that this is a matter that requires a pre-bail report. Whereas, it is not in every case that bail is opposed that such a report is to be availed and each case must be determined on the basis of its own circumstances, occasions do arise when the Court may, on its own motion or upon prodding by either of the party direct that such a report be availed. The purpose of the report is not to dictate to the Court whether or not to release the accused to bond but simply to assist the Court in determining whether or not the accused ought to be so released and if so o what terms. The Court is however not bound by such a report.
4. Accordingly, I hereby direct the probation officer to undertake the appropriate inquiries from all the parties concerned and file a report to this Court.
5. Orders accordingly.
RULING READ, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MACHAKOS 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
G V ODUNGA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr Wairegi for the 1st accused.
Ms Wanjiru Njihia for the 2nd accused
Mr Wathome for the family
Mr Ngetich for the State
CA Susan