REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE JUDICIAL REVIEW NO. 4 OF 2018 REPUBLIC................................................................................................APPLICANT GERALD NJOROGE MBURU....................................................................EXPARTE AND THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE, KITALE......................................1ST RESPONDENT THE KENYA FOREST SERVICE..............................................2ND RESPONDENT THE OFFICER IN CHARGE KITALE POLICE STATION...3RD RESPONDENT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.....................................................4TH RESPONDENT RULING 1. The court has perused the application dated 5/12/2018 by the exparte applicant. The same was not opposed by the Respondents. 2. The proceedings from the lower court shows that the Applicant was not a party though a registered owner of the motor vehicle in question Section 389 A (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code anticipates that the notice of forfeiture ought to be served upon the owner of the property. This shall enable him to show cause why the same should not be forfeited. 3. In light of the above omission the application is hereby allowed with no order as to costs. Delivered, signed and dated at Kitale this 20th Day of December, 2018. __________________ H.K. CHEMITEI JUDGE 20/12/18 In the presence of: Arunga for the Applicant Kakoi for the Respondent Court Assistant – Kirong Ruling read in open court.
Original judgment
Republic & 1 other v The Chief Magistrate, Kitale & 3 others
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.