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

Gao Chuntian v Republic

Chuntian v Republic (Criminal Miscellaneous Application E116 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 11666 (KLR) (Crim) (23 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 11666 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI LAW COURTS) CRIMINAL CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION E116 OF 2026 AM MUTETI, J JUNE 23, 2026 BETWEEN GAO CHUNTIAN .................................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The Applicant seeks temporary release of her passport vide an application dated 18th June 2026. The applicant intends to travel briefly to China for medical reasons. 2. The ODPP is not opposed to the temporary release of the passport to her for the purpose. 3. The court is persuaded that since the Applicant has unequivocally undertaken to return to Kenya and return the passport to court, there would be no reason to decline the request for temporary release. Accordingly, since the applicant is still considered innocent under Article 50 of the Constitution and Article 29 guarantees her right to liberty, the application is allowed. 4. The applicant shall have the passport released to her temporarily to be returned to the court on or before the 10th July 2026. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 23RD day of JUNE 2026. A. M. MUTETI JUDGE In the presence of: Court Assistant: Habiba https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11666/eng@2026-06-23 1

page 1 of 2

Owino for the Applicant Mogere for Respondent https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11666/eng@2026-06-23 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.