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

Bernard Muigai Mutambu v Republic [2015] KEHC 1906 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 1906 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1906
Citation
[2015] KEHC 1906 (KLR)
Decided
14 October 2015
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCriminal AppealPostureApplication for Bail Pending AppealCoramL. KIMARU, G.W. NGENYE – MACHARIA
Holding

The Applicant’s application to be released on bail pending appeal has merit and is hereby allowed.

Facts

The Applicant was convicted of two counts of committing a civilian offence contrary to Section 133(1)(b) of the Kenya Defence Forces Act. He was found in possession of and dealing in wildlife trophy, specifically two elephant tasks weighing 10 kilogrammes. He was sentenced to serve seven (7) years imprisonment.

Issues

  1. Jurisdiction of the Court Martial to try the Applicant on a civilian offence
  2. Overwhelming chances of success of the appeal

Reasoning

The court agreed with the Applicant that he will be prejudiced by his continued incarceration if the possibility that his appeal would succeed is likely.

Outcome

The Applicant’s application to be released on bail pending appeal is allowed.

Orders

  • The Applicant is released on bail pending appeal on condition that he deposits a cash bail of Kshs.100,000/- or posts a bond of Kshs.500,000/- with one surety of a similar amount.
  • The Applicant shall be required to appear before the Deputy Registrar of this court once every month for the mention of his case until the hearing and determination of the appeal.
  • The appeal should be listed for hearing within the next ninety (90) days.

Remedies

  • Release on bail pending appeal

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Kenya Defence Forces Act
  • Wildlife Conservation and Management Act
Cases cited (3)
  • Jivraj Shah v Republic [1986] KLR 605
  • Somo v Republic [1972] E A 476
  • Daniel Dominic Karanja v Republic
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