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

Francis Mburu Machua v Director of Public Prosecutions & 3 others [2018] KEHC 4113 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 4113 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
4113
Citation
[2018] KEHC 4113 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureRespondents' appeal from a decision of the High Court of Kenya at KiambuCoramAPPLICANT, RUTH WAN, Korir, Odunga, The Hon.
Holding

The court found that the Respondents have not violated the Applicant’s constitutional rights and have not infringed the rules of natural justice.

Facts

The ex parte Applicant was an advocate of the High Court of Kenya who was arraigned in 2014 in connection with a sale agreement for Limuru Township plot No. 157. In 2017, he was charged with eight counts of conspiracy to defraud and eight counts of forgery, along with his co-accused.

Issues

  1. Whether the Respondents have violated the Applicant’s constitutional rights.
  2. Whether the Respondents have infringed the rules of natural justice.

Reasoning

The court held that judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, not the merits of the decision. The court emphasized that the DPP’s exercise of his mandate under Article 157 of the Constitution and the ODPP Act is not to be lightly interfered with.

Outcome

Affirmed

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Article 157 of the Constitution
Cases cited (3)
  • Municipal Council of Mombasa -v- Republic & Umoja Consultants Ltd. Civil Appeal No. 185 of 2001 (2002) e KLR
  • Republic v Attorney General & 4 others ex parte Kenneth Kariuki Githii [2014 eKLR]
  • Republic v Commissioner of police & Another ex parte Michael Monari & Another [2012] e KLR
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