Dande & 4 others v Inspector General, National Police Service & 2 others
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that courts will not stop police investigations unless you prove they are vexatious, oppressive, or in bad faith.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Standard of judicial review of police arrest and investigation powers
The review court examines legality and abuse of power, not the sufficiency or manner of gathering evidence; findings on evidentiary adequacy belong to the trial court.
Article 245(2)(b) and (4) protects the independence of the Inspector-General; the review court intervenes only where powers are exercised illegally, vexatiously, oppressively, in bad faith or unreasonably. Alleged investigative shortcomings go to evidence for the trial court, not to judicial review.
Pre-charge interventions and premature review
Where no decision to charge has been made, judicial review findings would be prejudicial and would contravene the constitutional independence of the police and the DPP.
Since no charge had been preferred at the time of the High Court's ruling, any preemptive findings by the review court would be presumptuous and would interfere with the constitutional mandates of the investigative organs; the DPP's decision on review was still unknown.
Alleged ulterior motives arising from parallel civil suits
Absent evidence of the complainant's influence or control over the police beyond lodging a complaint, parallel civil proceedings do not demonstrate bad faith or abuse of the criminal process.
The Appellants alleged the criminal process was manipulated for the 3rd Respondent's commercial interests, but produced no evidence of control over the Respondents. The police acted on a complaint and detailed the evidence gathered; at the time the argument was speculative since no criminal proceedings had commenced.
Legal principles established
#- A judicial review court may not conduct merit review of police investigations or direct the manner in which evidence is gathered; its jurisdiction is confined to illegality, abuse of power, unreasonableness and bad faith.
- Civil and criminal proceedings may arise from the same facts; the pendency of civil proceedings does not bar criminal investigation or prosecution.
- An arrest or investigation grounded on a complaint, supported by information gathered giving credence to it, is not an abuse of power absent proof of vexatiousness, oppression, bad faith or unreasonableness.
- The likelihood that an arrest or investigation will not be upheld is not itself a ground for finding it unreasonable.
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- Judicial Review Misc. Application No 435 of 2014
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal to the Court of Appeal under the Constitution and applicable appellate statutes (the judgment does not state the specific provision)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (2)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Osho Chemical Industries Limited v Directorate of Criminal Investigations & others[2025] KEHC 210 (KLR)22 Jan 2025applied
- Elphus Mutuma & another v Inspector General of Police & others[2025] KEHC 212 (KLR)22 Jan 2025applied
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Dande & 4 others v Inspector General, National Police Service & 2 others", Case Analysis (2022). Civil Appeal 246 of 2016. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/170/eng@2022-02-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.