Kiplangat v Republic (Criminal Revision E065 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 8128 (KLR) (9 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 8128 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA CRIMINAL REVISION E065 OF 2026 DR KAVEDZA, J JUNE 9, 2026 BETWEEN ANTONY KIPLANGAT .......................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. This Revision application has been brought by way of a notice of motion dated 23rd April 2026. The Applicant seeks that the court revises or sets aside the orders of the trial magistrate cancelling the bond terms issued by the said court. 2. The background to this revision is contained in the trial file which I have perused. The accused person was arraigned before the trial court at JKIA Chief Magistrate’s Court E009 of 2023 facing two counts of traficking in narcotic drugs contrary to section 4(a)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Pyschotropic Substances Control Act, No. 4 of 1994. He pleaded not guilty and was released on bond of Kshs. 50,000 with one surety or in the alternative a cash bail of Kshs. 20,000. 3. The trial commenced but the applicant absconded court on 10th March 2026 and 2nd April 2026. The court issued a warrant of arrest. The applicant presented himself to court on 23rd April 2026 and advanced reasons why he could not attend court on the stated dates. Consequently, the trial court cancelled the bond terms. The applicant filed the present application seeking reinstatement of the bond terms. 4. The applicant asserts that he has never absconded throughout his trial. That during the period he failed to attend court, he intended to attend court virtually but there was no power in his premises. He insists that he is not a flight risk. He urged the court to reinstate the bond terms issued. 5. Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code which has been invoked by the Applicant empowers this court to call for and examine the record of any criminal proceedings before any subordinate court https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8128/eng@2026-06-09 1
page 1 of 2
for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality, or propriety of any finding or order recorded and the regularity of any proceedings of any such subordinate court. The actions that this court can take when exercising its revisionary jurisdiction are provided for under Section 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 6. Be that as it may, this application is founded on bail or bond and therefore, article 49(1) (h) of the Constitution as well as Section 123 of the Criminal Procedure Code are relevant. Section 123 A specifically provides; “ subject to Article 49 (1) (h) of the Constitution and notwithstanding section 123 in making a decision on bail and bond the court shall have regard to all the relevant circumstances in particular nature and seriousness of the ofience, the character, antecedents, association, and community ties of the accused person the defendants record in respect of the fulfilment of obligations under previous grants of bail the strength of the chance of his having committed the ofience." 7. As the application concerns cancellation of bond, Article 49(1)(h) of the Constitution and sections 123 and 123A of the Criminal Procedure Code are relevant. In determining matters relating to bail and bond, the court must consider all relevant circumstances, including the nature of the ofience, the accused person's character and antecedents, community ties, and compliance with previous bond terms. 8. I have examined the trial court record. It shows that the Applicant was afiorded an opportunity to explain his absence before the bond was cancelled. Upon considering those reasons, the trial court found them unsatisfactory and proceeded to cancel the bond. 9. I find no illegality, impropriety, or irregularity in the trial court's decision. The cancellation of bond was a proper exercise of judicial discretion in the circumstances. 10. Accordingly, the application lacks merit and is dismissed. It is so ordered. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2026 ________________ D. KAVEDZA JUDGE In the presence of: Oyaro for the Applicant Mutuma for the Respondent Karimi Court Assistant. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8128/eng@2026-06-09 2
page 2 of 2