REPUBLIC OF KENYA High Court at Kisumu Miscellaneous Criminal Case 95 of 2012 ERICK OKINYO NYAKINA …......................................................ACCUSED VERSUS REPUBLIC …......................................................................PROSECUTOR RULING The applicants application dated 27th November 2012 pray that the Criminal case number 472 of 2011 Kisumu be transferred to another court for retrial and that his bond be reinstated. His affidavit sworn on 26th November 2012 depones that he was never supplied with the witnesses statements during the hearing and he disputed the Ruling of 4th September 2012. The State did not oppose the application. I have perused the lower court's proceedings as well as the Ruling. I notice that the applicant's bond was cancelled for failing to attend court on 13th March 2012 and he only came back on 16th April 2012. He however offered no explanation or evidence to back up his indisposition. This court at this juncture is not required to deal with this matter as though it is an appeal. The applicant has demanded a retrial. I however on the face of the proceedings already undertaken see no reasons to order a retrial. He failed on four (4) occasions to offer any defence and the court was left with no other option but to close the defence case. For now I do not see any merit in the application. The applicant should go back and finalize his case and if dissatisfied he can proceed to file his appeal to this court . In the interest of justice however I shall order that his bond be reinstated as before . Orders accordingly. Dated, signed and delivered at Kisumu this 6th day of May 2013. H.K. CHEMITEI JUDGE In the presence of: …...................................for appellant …...................................for the respondents HKC/aao
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.