Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Misc. Cr. App. 14 of 2008 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | KENNETH KIPRONO NGENO v REPUBLIC |
| Date Delivered: | 17 Dec 2008 |
| Case Class: | Criminal |
| Court: | High Court at Kericho |
| Case Action: | Ruling |
| Judge(s): | MA Ang'awa |
| Citation: | KENNETH KIPRONO NGENO v REPUBLIC [2008] eKLR |
| Case Summary: | [RULING]CRIMINAL PROCEDURE- Bail- application for bail pending appeal- applicant charged with felling and cutting the forest, entering the Government Forest without permission and possession of forest produce- application brought on grounds of excessive sentence- where applicant pleaded guilty- application opposed on grounds of sentence was below minimum- whether there were exceptional circumstances to grant the order- whether the application was allowed Forest Act Section 4(1), 52(1) |
| 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 KERICHO
Misc. Cr. App. 14 of 2008
KENNETH KIPRONO NGENO …………………………….APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC ……………..…………………………………RESPONDENT
RULING
1: Background
1. This is brought under a certificate of urgency by the 1st applicant original plaintiff that he be released on bail pending appeal.
2. The applicant has with two others been accordingly pleaded guilty to a charge on three counts for felling and cutting the forest contrary to section 4(1) of the Forest Act. Entering into the Government Forest without permission contrary to section 52(1) and being in possession of forest produce.
3. The three accused together with the applicant herein pleaded guilty to all the three counts and were accordingly convicted. They thereafter were sentenced to imprisonment term in default of not paying the fine.
II: Application
4. The applicant prays for bail pending appeal. The state opposes this and prays that the sentence is below minimum as required by law.
III: Findings
5. I have an opportunity of perusing the file from the lower court, the appeal file and proceedings therein.
6. The applicant is convinced of an excessive sentence imposed. In this case the applicant pleaded guilty to the charge. Where this occurs there is no right of appeal unless with the discretion of the court. It is not a complete bar to appeal.
7. Bail pending appeal has been held to be given only in specific and special amenities. The special amenities has not been said but the applicant has indeed not demonstrated that there is any special circumstances for his release on bail. There must be a proper medical doctor’s report if that is what he relies in his affidavit.
8. Unfortunately the affidavit was deponed to by the advocate himself and not the applicant.
In the case of GIRDHAR DHANJI MASRAIM V REPUBLIC (1960) EA 320 (Shendan J)
Bail pending appeal is only given in exceptional circumstance
In the case of SIMON NYAGACHIKI KIVUTI V R (Ang’awa J) CA 126/08 unreported also emphasized this.
9. I accordingly find this application have no merits. It is dismissed.
DATED this 17th day of December, 2008 at KERICHO.
M.A. ANG’AWA
JUDGE
Advocate
J.M. Motanya advocate instructed by M/S Motanya & Co. advocates
for the applicant – present
R.K. Koech – State Counsel instructed by the Attorney General
for the respondent - present
Please Wait. Searching ...