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

Jared Bichanga v Inspector General of Police & Attorney General [2016] KEHC 5719 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 5719 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
5719
Citation
[2016] KEHC 5719 (KLR)
Decided
15 April 2016
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypePetition for Violation of Constitutional RightsPosturePetitioner's Petition against Respondents for alleged violations of Articles 25(a) and (c), 29(b) and (d), 45, 47(1), 48, 49(1)(c),(f)(i) and (h) of the ConstitutionCoramISAAC LENAOLA
Holding

The Petitioner's rights under Articles 25(a) and (c) of the Constitution were violated, and he is entitled to compensation.

Facts

Petitioner was arrested on 11th July 2011 and detained for five days without being charged. He alleged he was subjected to torture and inhuman treatment.

Issues

  1. Whether the Petitioner's rights under Articles 25(a) and (c), 29(b) and (d) of the Constitution were violated
  2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to compensation for illegal detention

Reasoning

The court found that the Petitioner was arrested without a reason and detained for five days without being charged, which violated his rights to freedom from torture and a fair trial.

Outcome

The Petitioner's rights were violated, and he is entitled to compensation of Kshs.150,000.

Orders

  • A declaration that the Petitioner's rights were denied, infringed and violated
  • Compensation of Kshs.150,000 for illegal detention
  • Payment of costs to the Petitioner

Remedies

  • Compensation of Kshs.150,000
  • Payment of costs to the Petitioner

Authorities cited

Legislation (4)
  • Article 25 of the Constitution
  • Article 29 of the Constitution
  • Article 50(1) of the Constitution
  • Article 51(2) of the Constitution
Cases cited (2)
  • Juan Akinyi Kabaselleh and 2 Others vs AG Petition No. 41 of 2014
  • Peter Kagume Kariuki (supra)
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case