SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

REPUBLIC v DORCAS NDUKU & 2 others [2008] KEHC 612 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 612 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
612
Citation
[2008] KEHC 612 (KLR)
Decided
16 December 2008
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCriminalPostureAppeal from a previous criminal caseCoramISAAC LENAOLA
Holding

The objection is overruled as it lacks merit and is not properly raised.

Facts

The 1st and 2nd accused persons were charged with murder, but were discharged upon a nolle prosequi being entered in their previous proceedings. They now object to the taking of the plea for the alleged offence of murder, claiming their constitutional rights were violated.

Issues

  1. Whether the objection to the taking of the plea for the alleged offence of murder is valid
  2. What remedies are available to the accused persons if their constitutional rights were violated

Reasoning

The court finds that the accused persons were not held in custody beyond the 14 days envisaged by Section 72 (3) of the Constitution. The court also notes that the remedy for violation of constitutional rights is not limited to release of a suspect.

Outcome

The plea for the alleged offence of murder shall now be taken.

Remedies

  • Compensation from the person who unlawfully arrested or detained the accused person
  • Application to the High Court for redress if any of the provisions of sections 70 to 83 (inclusive) has been, is being or is likely to be contravened in relation to the accused person

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Section 72 (1) and (2) of the Constitution
  • Constitution of Kenya (Supervisory jurisdiction and Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of the individual) High Court Practice and Procedure Rules, 2006
Cases cited (2)
  • Albanus Mutua vs R – Cr. Appeal No. 120/2004
  • H.C.Cr. 33/2008 – R vs Mwania Kithome
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case