Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Kelvin Kipchumba Chesire v Republic

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU MISC APPLICATION NO. 67 OF 2015 KELVIN KIPCHUMBA CHESIRE …………………………………….... APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC …………………………………………………..…….….. RESPONDENT RULING The applicant KELVIN KIPCHUMBA CHESIRE has filed this Notice of Motion dated 15/10/2015 seeking to be granted anticipatory bail. The Applicant claims that police in Nakuru are searching for him, his arrest is imminent and that there has been interference in his normal activities. The application is opposed by the State. The police in Nakuru aver that they have no interest in arresting applicant. I have considered the oral submissions made by both parties in this matter. The applicant has not shown how or in what manner the Respondent have breached or have threatened to breach any of his fundamental rights. There has been no instance given of any violation by the police of the applicants rights to liberty. With respect to the applicant these fears appear to be confined only to his imaginations. There exists no specific provisions in law or in the Constitution on the grant of bail to a person fearing arrest. Article 49(1) (h) of the Constitution provides for a right to bail to a ‘suspect’ ie one who has already been investigated, arrested and/or arraigned in court. I find no evidence of a breach of any of the applicant’s rights by a State organ. The Respondents state that they have no reason or interest in arresting the applicant. I find that this present application has no basis. The same is hereby dismissed with no orders on costs. Dated in Nakuru this 2nd day of September, 2016. Mr Chigiti for DPP No appearance by Mr. Ngamate Maureen Odero Judge 2/9/2016

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.