Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
High CourtDismissedNotice of Motion dated 18th December 2023 (Makadara Magistrate's Court criminal case, warrant of arrest issued 14th December 2023)

Brian Mwenda Njagi v Director of Public Prosecutions & Directorate of Criminal Investigations

High Court of Kenya
9 January 2024
1,734 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court refused to cancel an arrest warrant against Brian Mwenda, ruling that fleeing court before a plea justifies a warrant.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Brian Mwenda Njagi, charged at Makadara Magistrate's Court with offences relating to masquerading as an Advocate, vanished from the dock on 14th December 2023 before his file was called for plea-taking. The trial Magistrate issued a warrant of arrest the same day. Four days later the Applicant moved the High Court by Notice of Motion dated 18th December 2023, citing Articles 50 and 159 of the Constitution, seeking the lifting of the warrant. He claimed he suffered a panic attack and was evacuated by his Advocate, Mr Kasaya. On 8th January 2024 the Law Society of Kenya was joined as an Interested Party with participation limited to oral submissions. The Application was heard orally on 9th January 2024 before Prof (DR) Nixon Sifuna, Judge, sitting as Vacation Duty Judge. The respondents, through prosecution counsel Ms Ntabo, submitted the warrant was properly issued and there was no illegality, impropriety or error. The Court held the cited Articles were irrelevant; the proper route was the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 165(6) and (7) read with Sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which the Applicant had not invoked. The Court found the panic-attack story feigned, resembling court drama, noting the Applicant appeared virtually from a location near Muthaiga Police Station while pretending to be hospitalised. Holding the warrant duly issued since the accused had vanished before plea, the Court dismissed the Application and ordered execution of the warrant, directing the Applicant to present himself to the OCS near Muthaiga Police Station by 12.30 PM that day for arrest and presentment before Makadara Magistrate's Court the next morning for plea-taking, failing which any police officer or member of the public could arrest him. No costs order was made.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the warrant of arrest issued in the Applicant's absence should be lifted

Holding

The warrant was duly and deservedly issued because the Applicant had vanished from the courtroom before his file was called for plea-taking; the Application was dismissed and execution of the warrant directed

Reasoning

The Court distinguished a warrant issued in the presence of an accused (improper) from one issued after the accused absconds before plea (proper). The Applicant's panic-attack explanation was rejected as feigned, a premeditated scheme to exit the courtroom. The cited Articles 50 and 159 were irrelevant, and supervisory jurisdiction under Article 165(6) and (7) was never invoked to found intervention.

p. 3
02

Whether the constitutional provisions cited in the Application founded the Court's jurisdiction

Holding

Articles 50(1), 50(2) and 159 are irrelevant to the quest to lift the warrant; the proper route was supervisory jurisdiction under Article 165(6) and (7) read with Sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which was not invoked

Reasoning

The Court analysed each cited Article: Article 50(1) concerns fair hearing rights generally, Article 50(2) an accused person's rights, and Article 159 the exercise of judicial authority - none authorises lifting a warrant. Intervention requires invoking the supervisory jurisdiction and demonstrating illegality, incorrectness, impropriety or error, which the Applicant failed to do.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The High Court cannot intervene on a warrant or subordinate court decision on mere lamentations; supervisory jurisdiction under Article 165(6) and (7) and Sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code must be properly and clearly invoked with a basis laid for intervention
  • A warrant of arrest issued in the absence of an accused who has absconded from the dock before plea is properly issued; a warrant issued while the accused is in the dock would be improper and would be set aside
  • A party joining proceedings as an interested party may have participation limited (here to oral submissions only) in a criminal application principally between the applicant and the State

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Application dismissed
  2. 2.The warrants of arrest issued on 14th December 2023 by the Makadara Magistrate's Court to be executed as by law contemplated
  3. 3.Applicant ordered to present himself to the nearest police station for arrest and presentment before the Makadara Magistrate's Court the following day at 9.00 in the forenoon or soon thereafter for plea-taking
  4. 4.Applicant directed to present himself to the OCS of the police station near Muthaiga (identified by the Applicant) by 12.30 PM the same day to be arrested and placed in police custody
  5. 5.Applicant's Advocate Mr Kasaya directed to facilitate the Applicant's presentment at the said police station
  6. 6.Failing presentment, any police officer or member of the public finding him may arrest him and present him to the nearest police station, with a report made to any court station to facilitate his transit to Makadara Magistrate's Court for plea-taking
Jurisdiction invoked
Articles 165(6) and (7) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 (supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate courts), read with Sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Brian Mwenda Njagi v Director of Public Prosecutions & Directorate of Criminal Investigations", Case Analysis (2024). Notice of Motion dated 18th December 2023 (Makadara Magistrate's Court criminal case, warrant of arrest issued 14th December 2023). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.