Republic v Nayoma (Criminal Case E006 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 1910 (KLR) (30 January 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 1910 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAROK CRIMINAL CASE E006 OF 2025 CM KARIUKI, J JANUARY 30, 2026 BETWEEN REPUBLIC ........................................................................................... PROSECUTION AND SARUNI OLE NAYOMA ............................................................................. ACCUSED RULING 1. The accused was charged with the offence of murder Contrary to Section 203 and 204 of Cap 63 of the Penal Code. Particulars being that on 1/2/2025 at Sakutiek Trading Centree within Narok Township in Narok Township in Narok East Sub County within Narok County murdered Joseph Ndicho Kiarie. 2. The matter went into pre-trial directions in which the accused advocate sought accused to be released on bond. The same was opposed. The court ordered for Pre-Bond Report (PBR) which was filed and had recommendation: and Conclusion: to the effect; The accused before court is Saruni Mayoma, 30 years old, he comes from Wafo area in Melili. 3. He was married and had two children, but the wife left due to domestic violence and currently resides at Mulot the accused has no formal criminal history and has family support. However the nature of the offence, his alleged history of fleeing, and potential risk to intimidation of witnesses provides significant concerns. 4. The accused is charged with a capital offence and was reportedly difficult to apprehend after he fled. Recommendation: 5. Given the seriousness of the offence and strong indication of previous flight and potential future flight risk, the risk of witness intimidation, particularly as the accused is from the local area and are not. I therefore recommend that he can be given bond at a later stage when the key witnesses have testified. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/1910/eng@2026-01-30 1
page 1 of 2
6. The recommendation is negative on grant of bail/bond on basis of intimidation of witness and flight risk fear. The threshold of grant is well set by the constitution and the statutes plus a plethora of case law. Thus, court analyses the same to see whether the factors in fact in court met same threshold. 7. In Kenya, denial of bail or bond pending trial is mandated only when "compelling reasons" exist, such as on the basis of a likelihood of the accused to abscond, interfere with witnesses, or commit further offenses. Key factors include the severity of the charge (e.g., murder, robbery with violence), risk to public safety, prior criminal record, and potential threats to victims. 8. Key factors dictating the denial of bail in Kenya include: i. Compelling Reasons & Risk of Absconding: Courts look for evidence that the accused might not appear for trial, such as lack of fixed abode, lack of family ties, or possessing assets abroad. ii. Interference with Investigations/Witnesses: A high probability that the accused will threaten, intimidate, or tamper with witnesses or evidence can lead to denial. iii. Severity of the Offense: Serious crimes such as murder, treason, robbery with violence, and serious sexual offenses often result in higher risks to society, leading to a higher likelihood of bond denial. iv. Protection of the Victim/Public Safety: The need to protect the victim(s) or the community from the accused, especially if the accused has a history of violence. v. Previous Failure to Observe Bail Terms: If the accused has previously jumped bail, violated bond conditions, or defaulted on court appearances, bail is likely to be denied. vi. Negative Probation Report/Background: An unfavorable pre-bail report indicating high risk, lack of community ties, or a bad reputation. vii. Safety of the Accused: In rare circumstances, if release poses a serious, credible threat to the life of the accused (e.g., mob justice), bail might be denied for their protection. 10. Under Article 49(1)(h) of the constitution of Kenya, an accused person has a right to be released on bond or bail, but this is not absolute, allowing for the "compelling reasons" exception to be applied by judicial officers 11. The inclined to go by the PBR recommendation that the issue of granting bond be reconsidered at a later stage when the key witnesses have testified. 12. Thus, the court makes the orders that. a. The prosecution to identify witnesses who ought to testify before accused re-lease on bond is reconsidered. b. The same witnesses to be heard on priority basis. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAROK VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS THIS 30TH JANUARY, 2026. ………………………… CHARLES KARIUKI JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/1910/eng@2026-01-30 2
page 2 of 2