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

Doo v Republic

DOO v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E022 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 3756 (KLR) (19 April 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 3756 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISUMU MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION E022 OF 2024 RE ABURILI, J APRIL 19, 2024 BETWEEN DOO ........................................................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT (From the original conviction and sentence in Senior Principal Magistrate’s Court Criminal Sexual Offences Case No E074 of 2021 at Maseno) RULING 1. I have considered the application dated 3rd March 2024 seeking leave of court to file an appeal out of time. 2. The Applicant Daniel Otieno Owiti was convicted and sentenced to serve Fifteen (15) years for the ofiences of defilement contrary to Section 8(1) and 8(3) of the Sexual Offences Act and deliberate transmission of HIV Contrary to Section 26 (1) of the Sexual Offence Act. 3. He claims that the delay to file appeal was occasioned by his family who promised to get him a lawyer in vain. 4. Despite the delay from 5th January 2023, the Applicant deserves a chance to challenge his conviction and sentence. 5. I grant the Applicant leave to file and file an appeal out of time. 6. The appeal to be filed and served within 14 days of today. 7. Signal to issue. 8. File closed. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/3756/eng@2024-04-19 1

page 1 of 2

9. I so order. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 19TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 R. E. ABURILI JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/3756/eng@2024-04-19 2

page 2 of 2

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.