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

John Okello Ogutu v Republic

Ogutu v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E021 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 6842 (KLR) (20 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 6842 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MAKADARA MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION E021 OF 2026 MS SHARIFF, J MAY 20, 2026 BETWEEN JOHN OKELLO OGUTU ........................................................................ APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant John Okello Ogutu approached this court by way of a notice of motion dated 10.2.2026, supported by his own affidavit of even date wherein he craved for the following orders: a. Spent b. The Honourable Court be pleased to set aside the ruling of Honourable H. Mbati dated 4/2/2026 directing the applicant to pay a cash bail of Kshs. 600,000/=and in its place order and direct the applicant to be released on more reasonable bail terms pending hearing and determination of the Preliminary Objection dated 4/2/2026 filed in Makadara Chief Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case Number MCCR E1145 of 2025. c. The Honourable Court be pleased to issue an order directing the released of the applicant on personal and/or free bond of a reasonable amount pending hearing and determination of the preliminary objection dated 4/2/2026 and filed by the applicant challenging the entire criminal prosecution of a civil and contractual dispute in the Kenyan courts despite there being an ouster clause in the Consultancy Agreement between the applicant and the company in Spain. d. The Honourable Court be pleased to issue an order directing the Officer Commanding Industrial Area Prison to release the applicant forthwith pursuant to the orders of court issued in (b) and (c) above. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/6842/eng@2026-05-20 1

page 1 of 2

e. The Honourable Court be pleased to issue any other orders it may deem fit and just in the circumstance. f. Costs of this application be provided for. 2. The applicant has invoked the provisions of article 49 (1) (h) of the Constitution of Kenya 20210 and all enabling provisions of the law. 3. I have considered the applicant’s notice of motion dated 10/2/2026, the affidavit in support thereof sworn on even date and the annexures attached thereto. I have also considered the oral submissions of Mr. Oyugo for the applicant and Ms. Kariuki for the respondent while noting that the respondent has not filed any response yet but concedes to the reduction of cash bail from Kshs. 600,000/= to Kshs. 500,000/=. 4. It is evident from the annextures attached to the supporting affidavit that the applicant is not only elderly being 77 years old, but he is also attending treatment at Kenyatta National Hospital. He has deposed that he is willingly to abide by the reviewed bond terms in the event his application succeeds. 5. Article 49 (1) (h) enshrines the right of an accused be released on bond or bail on reasonable terms unless there exists compelling reason to decline bond. 6. Given the circumstances prevailing herein, I am inclined to allow this application and I do hereby set aside the order of the trial court made on 9th January 2026. 7. The applicant shall be released on cash bail of Kshs. 350,000/=. 8. The applicant’s son one David Oluoch Ogutu is hereby ordered to stand as the applicant’s surety upon executing a personal bond. 9. This file is hereby marked as closed. DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MAKADARA THIS 20TH DAY OF MAY, 2026. M. S. SHARIFF JUDGE In the presence of Court Assistant - Annastacia. Ms Kariuki for the State. Mr. Oyugo for the applicant. John Okello Ogutu - Applicant. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/6842/eng@2026-05-20 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.