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

The Honourable Attorney General v Justus Shikunga Were & 1 other

Attorney General v Were & another (Civil Appeal E002 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 1678 (KLR) (9 February 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 1678 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT BUSIA CIVIL APPEAL E002 OF 2025 WM MUSYOKA, J FEBRUARY 9, 2026 BETWEEN THE HONOURABLE ATTORNEY GENERAL .................................. APPELLANT AND JUSTUS SHIKUNGA WERE ........................................................ 1ST RESPONDENT DINESH KUMAR PATEL ............................................................ 2ND RESPONDENT (Appeal from the judgement and decree of Hon. Lucy Ambasi, Chief Magistrate in Busia CMCC No. 87 of 2020, of 27th April 2023) RULING 1. I am unable to write a judgment in this matter, as the appellant has not filed a record of appeal, and the judgment, impugned in the appeal, is not in the original trial records, availed by the trial court. 2. Let the appellant file a record of appeal, complete with a copy of the impugned Judgment. 3. Let the Deputy Registrar cause the original trial court judgment to be traced, and placed in the original trial court records. 4. The matter shall be mentioned thereafter, before the Judge, on a date to be allocated by the Deputy Registrar. DELIVERED, VIA EMAIL, DATED AND SIGNED IN CHAMBERS, AT BUSIA ON THIS 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026. WM MUSYOKA JUDGE Mr. Arthur Etyang, Court Assistant, Busia. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/1678/eng@2026-02-09 1

page 1 of 2

Advocates; Mr. Nyauma, instructed by the Attorney General, for the appellant. Mr. Okutta, instructed by Ouma-Okutta & Company, Advocates for the 1st respondent. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/1678/eng@2026-02-09 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.