Joseph Mwaluku alias Mwalili v Director of Public Prosecution [2018] KEHC 3586 (KLR) | Right To Fair Trial | Esheria

Joseph Mwaluku alias Mwalili v Director of Public Prosecution [2018] KEHC 3586 (KLR)

Full Case Text

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA

MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.70 OF 2015

JOSEPH MWALUKU alias MWALILI.............................APPLICANT

VERSUS

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION ............….RESPONDENT

RULING

1. The applicant has by way of Notice of  Motion dated 24th July 2015,   requested that this court calls for Mombasa Chief Magistrate’s  Court Criminal case No. 3451 of 2009, Republic vs Joseph Mwaluku  and  examine  the same for  purposes of satisfying  itself as to the correctness, legality and propriety of the order  of the trial court of 14th July, 2015 and of the proceedings generally.

2.  The application is supported by the grounds in the supporting  affidavit sworn by Mr Kioko Maundu, Counsel for the applicant  in which he  has given a  chronology of the  events in the aforesaid criminal case.

3.  The main ground of the application is that the case which was first initiated before the court on 29. 10. 2009, has been slated for  hearing before five (5) different magistrates  for  more than twenty (20) occasions but never taken off for lack of witnesses. That only two witnesses have testified in the matter where several orders of last adjournment have been granted and not honoured by the various  magistrates who have been in  conduct of the  same.

4.  The applicant’s counsel deponed that he  and the accused person havefaithfully attended court on most of those occasions ready to proceed.

It is therefore the applicant’s  prayer that;

(a) the court finds the lower court’s  order of keeping on   adjourning the case  when witnesses fail to attend court for no good reason for  unreasonably long period  improper;

(b) the court proceeds to acquit or discharge the accused person  or;

(c) place the matter before  the learned magistrate with an order that the matter proceeds for  hearing on  one day only.

5. The application is made under section 362 of the Criminal Procedure  code which states;

“The High court may call for and examine the record of criminal proceedings before any subordinate court  for  the purposes of  satisfying  itself as to the correctness, legality and  propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed and as to the regularity of  any proceedings of any such subordinate court”

6.  I have perused the record in Mombasa “Criminal case No 3451 of 2009, Republic Vrs Joseph Mwaluku alias  Mwalili and confirm that  the same was initiated on 26. 10. 2009 and has been  pending  before court since   then. I also confirm that it has been handled by about five (5) magistrates and  adjourned for over ten (10) times on the ground of witnesses failing to attend court for hearing. I further confirm that on a number of occasions the prosecution has been granted a last adjournment but the same has never been enforced by the court.

Article 50 (2) (e ) of the Constitution provides that;

“Every accused person has the right to a fair trial which includes the right;

(e) to have the trial begin and concluded without  unreasonable delay”

7. It is therefore instructive to note that the pendency of this case before court since 2009 has  resulted into delay in  disposing the same hence an infringement of the applicant’s right  to fair  trial. The court is tasked with the mandate of ensuring that the rights and freedoms of the accused person are upheld so as to save them from  suffering irreparable loss,damage and prejudice.

8. While parties in a case are entitled to adjournments, the same must be granted with good reason. They must be earned. It is therefore upon  the court to exercise proper control of the court process and conduct of the parties before it in light of the provisions of Article 50 (2) (e) of the Constitution and  embracing the judiciary’s practices rules  on case management. The court, in granting parties adjournment orders, they must be firm and judicious in  enforcing them, to avoid being taken for granted.

9.   Having made the above observations, I find that to grant  the  prosecution  another adjournment would be improper  and a  furtherance of the  infringement  of the applicant’s  right to fair trial.

10.   I therefore order that the said Mombasa Criminal Case No 3451 of 2009 be placed before the trial magistrate within 7 days for fixing of a hearing date  on one day, which day, the prosecution to be ordered to avail heir witnesses or evidence and   close their case to enable the court  be geared towards  putting this case to a closure.

Orders accordingly.

Ruling delivered, signed and dated this 18th day of May, 2018.

LADY JUSTICE D. O. CHEPKWONY

In the  presence of ;

M/s Ngina, counsel for the state

Mr Olendi, counsel holding brief for  Mr Maundu for the Applicant

C/clerk- Beja