REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MURANG’A CRIMINAL CASE NO 11 OF 2012 (FORMERLY NYERI HCCR CASE NO 5 OF 2012) REPUBLIC.………………....PROSECUTOR VERSUS JOHN GITAHI MWANGI…….….ACCUSED RULING 1. The Accused herein, John Gitahi Mwangi, is charged with murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. It is alleged in the information dated 07/02/2012 that on 27.01.2012 at an unknown time at Gataragwa Village in Kamunge Sub-location of Murang’a County, he murdered one Jonna Mwangi On 12/03/2012 he pleaded not guilty to the charge. On 14/11/2012 the case was transferred from Nyeri to this court. 2. The Accused’s trial commenced on 20/05/2015. A date for further hearing will be given on 17/06/2016 after delivery of this ruling. 3. This ruling concerns the Accused’s application by notice of motion dated 03/03/2016 to be admitted to bail pending conclusion of his trial. The Republic does not oppose the application. 4. Bail pending trial is now a constitutional right for all criminal offences. It will be denied only for compelling reason; and any condition for such bail must be reasonable. See Article 49(1) (h) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010. 5. I have read the witness statements and other documents supplied to the Accused and to the Court by the prosecution, and I have noted the circumstances of the commission of the alleged offence. I have not found therein any compelling reason to deny the Accused bail. 6. I will in the event allow the application. The Accused shall be admitted to bail upon his own cognizance in the sum of KShs 300,000/00 and one surety in like sum. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AT MURANGA THIS 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2016 H P G WAWERU JUDGE DELIVERED AT MURANGA THIS 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2016
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.