Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Criminal Case 31 of 2013 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | REPUBLIC v JULIUS ODONGO NGICHO |
| Date Delivered: | 03 May 2013 |
| Case Class: | Criminal |
| Court: | |
| Case Action: | |
| Judge(s): | E.N.MAINA |
| Citation: | REPUBLIC v JULIUS ODONGO NGICHO[2013]eKLR |
| 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
Cases in Magistrate Courts
Criminal Case 31 of 2013
REPUBLIC………………………………….……………PROSECUTOR
JULIUS ODONGO NGICHO………………….…………….ACCUSED.
The accused is charged with murder c/sec. 203 as read with S. 204 of the Penal Code the particulars being that on 23.4.2013 at Genga Location within Homa Bay County jointly with others not before court murdered Erick Ochieng’ Odundo.
He pleaded not guilty to the charge and has applied to be released on bond pending his trial. The application was made by Mr. Ongoso under Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution.
The court was urged to consider that the accused surrendered himself to the police. Mr. Ongoso also contended that the accused was willing to provide sureties who shall ensure that he attends court.
The State did not oppose the application.
According to Miss Valery who represents the State there are no good reasons to do so. She urged the court to impose terms that will ensure that the accused does not abscond.
It would seem therefore that there are no compelling reasons not to release the accused. However I did obtain a pre-bail report which seems to suggest otherwise.
Mr. Ogada – Probation Officer Homa Bay has given a family background, personal history, antecedents and past character of the accused person which is very enlightening. The same cannot be ignored in making a ruling in this matter much as the court is guided by the principle that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. The report is made by an independent person who has stated that should the accused person be released, he is likely to be harmed and that it would be difficult to trace him were he to abscond as no member of his family is willing to stand surety for him.
The main consideration in granting bail is whether or not the accused person shall attend his trial and it has been demonstrated here that the accused is not likely to do so. In the circumstances I find that in this case there are compelling reasons not to release the accused and reject his application for bond.
Ruling dated, signed and delivered at Homa Bay this 3rd day of May 2013.
Please Wait. Searching ...