Ng’etich v Republic (Criminal Application E056 of 2025) [2025] KECA 1886 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal allowed a life-sentence prisoner to appeal four years late, showing courts may prioritise the right of appeal over unexplained delay.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicant has satisfied the principles in Salat v IEBC for extension of time to lodge an appeal to the Court of Appeal, having regard to the inordinate delay of almost four years
Key legal issues
#Whether the inordinate delay of almost four years was satisfactorily explained
The applicant's allegations that he was not supplied with the judgment and that a prior application was not acted upon were unsupported by evidence, so the delay was not satisfactorily explained; yet the court exercised its discretion in his favour because he is serving a life sentence and this may be his last chance to appeal.
The court applied the Salat principles: an applicant must explain the delay and show extenuating circumstances. The applicant's two grounds - non-supply of proceedings/judgment and an unacted-upon emailed application - were not supported by solid evidence such as a letter to the registry or a copy of the email. Nonetheless, the discretionary power, though it must be exercised judicially, was exercised to open the door to the applicant's right of appeal given the life sentence.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant for extension of time must explain the reasons for the delay and any extenuating circumstances; inordinate delay must be satisfactorily explained, with evidential support, before the discretion under Rule 4 will be exercised.
- Judicial discretion under Rule 4 is wide but must be exercised judicially and not capriciously, on what is right and equitable under the circumstances.
Court orders
#- 1.The applicant's undated application for extension of time is allowed
- 2.The applicant shall file his appeal within 45 days from the date of the ruling
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- High Court (Bomet HCCR Appeal No. 26 of 2019)
- Bomet HCCR Appeal No. 26 of 2019
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules (discretion to extend time)
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
It is incumbent upon the applicant to explain the reasons for delay in making the application for extension and whether there are any extenuating circumstances that can enable the Court to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant.
Therefore, the inordinate delay of almost four years has not been satisfactorily explained.
Accordingly, his undated application is hereby allowed. The applicant shall file his appeal within 45 days from the date of this ruling.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal tension: the court finds the delay unexplained and the evidence weak, yet allows the application; the concession by the respondent and the life sentence are given as the operative reasons.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ng’etich v Republic (Criminal Application E056 of 2025) [2025] KECA 1886 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Undated application for extension of time (Court of Appeal, Nakuru). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/1886/eng@2025-11-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.