Dida alias Shulka & another v Republic (Criminal Application E012 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1646 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal gave two people extra time to appeal because the delay wasn't their fault and prosecutors didn't object.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether time should be enlarged for the applicants to file their appeal out of time
- 2.Whether the appeal, if filed, should be deemed properly filed, and within what period the record of appeal should be filed if not yet filed
Key legal issues
#Whether time should be enlarged for the applicants to file their appeal out of time under Rule 4
Yes. The motion was granted, the delay having been explained as unintentional and occasioned by lack of legal representation and delay in obtaining proceedings, and the Republic having expressly indicated it was not opposed.
The court identified the relief sought as enlargement of time to appeal out of time. It observed that most grounds on the face of the motion were irrelevant to an extension application, but one disclosed that the delay was not intentional, having been occasioned by lack of legal representation and delay in obtaining the proceedings. The first applicant's affidavit accounted for these hardships on his own behalf and, under an Authority to Plead, on behalf of the second applicant. The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions expressly signalled non-opposition. On that basis the court exercised its discretion in the applicants' favour.
Whether the appeal, once filed, should be treated as properly filed, and within what period the record of appeal must be filed
The appeal, if filed, is deemed properly filed; if not yet filed, the record of appeal was to be filed within thirty days of the ruling.
Having enlarged time, the court made consequential directions to give the order practical effect. Where the appeal had already been filed pursuant to the enlargement, it was deemed properly filed, curing any objection premised on the original delay. Where the appeal had not yet been filed, the court fixed a definite window of thirty days from the date of the ruling for the record of appeal to be filed, ensuring that the applicants' restored right of appeal was exercised within a defined period rather than left open-ended.
Legal principles established
#- Where an application under Rule 4 for extension of time to appeal is unopposed by the Republic, and the delay is explained by circumstances such as lack of legal representation and delay in obtaining proceedings, the Court will grant the enlargement and deem the appeal properly filed.
Court orders
#- 1.The motion dated 1.4.26 granted, enlarging time for the applicants to file their appeal out of time
- 2.The appeal, if filed, deemed to be properly filed
- 3.If the appeal is not yet filed, the record of appeal to be filed within thirty (30) days of 31 July 2026
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 4 of the Rules of this Court (Court of Appeal Rules), under which the motion for enlargement of time to appeal out of time was brought
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.
That being the case, the motion be and is hereby granted. The appeal, if filed, is deemed to be properly filed. If not yet filed, I direct that the record of appeal be filed within thirty (30) days of today.
was not intentional but was occasioned by lack of legal representation and delay in obtaining proceedings.
given express indication that the Republic is not opposed to that application, among others.
Issues in the judgment
#The copy of the ruling provided omits the case caption and appeal number, and does not identify the court below or the decision appealed against; the case title was reconstructed from the parties named in the body of the ruling.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Dida alias Shulka & another v Republic (Criminal Application E012 of 2026) [2026] KECA 1646 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1646/eng@2026-07-31
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.