Abraham Kirotich Langat v Republic [2017] KEHC 9545 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI

CRIMINAL DIVISION

MISC. CR. APP. NO. 90 OF 2017

ABRAHAM KIROTICH LANGAT..………APPLICANT

VERSUS

REPUBLIC ………………………………RESPONDENT

RULING

For administrative purposes, notwithstanding that a High Court has unfettered unlimited jurisdiction, it would not be prudent for this court to consolidate bail/bond terms that were granted by magistrates’ courts where there are other High Courts. On the other hand, a trial court can only deny bail if there are compelling reasons.  I believe the magistrate at Eldoret took note of this when she/he granted the applicant bail.

For the matter pending in the Law Courts within Nairobi, the offences the Applicant face are bailable. Unless for any other purpose or reason, bail/bond should be granted. The mere fact that the Applicant faces other offences in other courts is not, of itself, reason to deny him bail.  As such, the applicant is advised to apply for bond/bail in those respective courts.  If bond/bail is given, the applicant should accordingly pay but the court may reserve his release until he pays bail/bond in the other courts and provide proof of the same.

As a guide, this ruling can be served on the trial courts at Makadara and City Court.  Otherwise, the application before me is premature as bond applications have been made before the two respective courts.

Mention on 23/10/2017 to confirm that the applicant has applied for bail at Makadara and City Courts.

DATED and DELIVERED this 4th day of October, 2017.

G.W. NGENYE-MACHARIA

JUDGE