Please Wait. Searching ...
|Case Number:||Cause 32 of 2013|
|Parties:||Antony Muritu Njoroge v Commissioner of Police,Permanent Secretary For Ministry of Internal Security & Attorney General|
|Date Delivered:||26 Jul 2013|
|Court:||Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru|
|Citation:||Antony Muritu Njoroge v Commissioner of Police & another  eKLR|
|Court Division:||Industrial Court|
|Parties Profile:||Individual v Government|
|Case Outcome:||Claim Partly 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 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU
CAUSE NO. 32 OF 2013
(Formerly Nairobi Cause No. 2237 of 2012)
ANTONY MURITU NJOROGE.........................................CLAIMANT
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ..........................1ST RESPONDENT
PERMANENT SECRETARY FOR
MINISTRY OF INTERNAL SECURITY..............2ND RESPONDENT
HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL............... ...........3RD RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 26th July, 2013)
The claimant Antony Muritu Njoroge filed the memorandum of claim on 06.11.2012 through Ikua, Mwangi & Company Advocates. The claimant prayed for judgment against the respondents for:
The respondents’ response to memorandum of claim was filed through the 3rd respondent, the Honourable Attorney General, on 03.01.2013 by the learned Litigation Counsel, Nanjala C.W. The respondents prayed that the court finds that the claimant’s dismissal was lawful and to dismiss the suit with costs.
The case was heard on 13.06.2013 when the claimant gave evidence to support. For the respondents' learned Senior Litigation Counsel Mr. E.N. Njuguna opted to rely on the pleadings and the documents filed for the claimant and did not call any witness.
The claimant was appointed to the National Police Service on 30.08.1997 as a police constable. At the time of dismissal, he was deployed at the office of the Provincial Police Officer, Rift valley at Nakuru town. He was engaged to use the police motorbike on 19.11.2010 to perform official assignments involving travelling to Nairobi and back to Nakuru.
Upon arrival in Nakuru, he decided to use the motorbike by riding to a place near the Nakuru police lines with a view of repairing his shoes. While at that place, he testified that he received information from his informant that the informant had cited a lorry ferrying bhang, a proscribed intoxicating drug, at Ndarugu Area within Nakuru Municipality. The testimony was that the informant did not provide the complete details of the registration number of the lorry and the claimant proceeded to the road in the stated area. He engaged by stopping every lorry to see if the drivers tallied his informant’s description.
In that process, a Toyota Van moved by, stopped and some men inside the van called the claimant to go to them. He complied and the men, according to the testimony, alleged that they had captured the claimant on their mobile phones’ cameras taking bribes from the motorists he had been stopping. The claimant testified that the three men directed him to follow them to the police station. At a distance of 400 meters or there about, the three men diverted into a feeder road and called the claimant along. The claimant was riding on the police motor bike behind the van.
They called the claimant to the van and the claimant complied with the order to get into the van. They ordered the claimant to surrender all the money he had collected from the motorists and after denying that he had such money, he gave them only Kshs.200/= which he testified was his money and that in fact, he had more than Kshs.1,500/= and which he did not surrender. As he produced the money from his pockets, one of the men recorded him using his phone’s camera. After handing in the Kshs.200/=, he was asked to leave the van. He demanded to be given his money back but he was not given at all. He went with the three men to the Nakuru Police Base instead of the Nakuru Central Police Station where the claimant was deployed in the Provincial Police Officer’s Office.
The orderly room proceedings were convened at 7.00 pm the same date, 19.10.2010. The charges were read to the claimant and he pleaded not guilty. The presiding officer declared that the men had left and the hearing was rescheduled for 26.11.2010. The claimant was not asked if he needed any assistance. Prior to the hearing, the claimant testified that he asked for the witness statements but these were not provided as the presiding officer ruled that he would record the evidence as the hearing progressed.
The orderly room proceedings are attached on the memorandum of claim. The claimant was charged with the offence of being guilty of an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline contrary to regulation 3(41) of the police regulations. He entered a plea of not guilty. The hearing was on 26.11.2010.
The court has perused the record of the orderly room proceedings. The witnesses from the Kenya Anti-corruption Commission who said they saw the claimant taking bribes from the motorists on the material day testified and they were cross-examined by the claimant. They informed the orderly room proceedings that the claimant had admitted receiving only Kshs.200/= in bribes and a further Kshs.1,000/= in his pockets was his private money. There is no doubt that the claimant and his activities were recorded by the Kenya Anti-corruption Commission officers and the video clip was played at the police station and P.W4 C.I Solomon Wamae who viewed the video clip testified before the presiding officer that the clip did not specifically show the claimant taking money from the motorists but it showed him stopping the lorries and releasing them. PW4 also informed the court that he had not assigned the claimant traffic duties at the place where the Kenya Anti-corruption Commission’s officers had found him. In view of the evidence, the presiding officer found:
The claimant was subsequently dismissed with effect from 8.12.2010 as per the letter of the same date attached on the claimant’s memorandum of claim. The claimant appealed against the dismissal by the letter dated 28.12.2010 but the appeal had not been determined and the claimant moved the court as there was no other path for justice.
The court has considered the pleadings, the documents, the evidence and the submissions on record and makes the following findings on the matters in issue:
In conclusion, judgment is entered for the parties for orders:
Signed, dated and delivered in court at Nakuru this Friday, 26th July, 2013.