Waswa v Republic (Criminal Revision E034 of 2023) [2026] KEHC 11699 (KLR) (24 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 11699 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NYERI CRIMINAL REVISION E034 OF 2023 M MUYA, J JUNE 24, 2026 BETWEEN EMMANUEL KWAYU WASWA ............................................................. APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The Notice of Motion application dated 5th June, 2023 seeks the following orders; 1. Spent. 2. That the Honourable Court be pleased to review and set aside the orders issued on 22nd May, 2023 rejecting the applicant’s application to re-open the defence case and re-call witnesses to enable him to prepare and challenge evidence. 3. That the court be pleased to issue such orders that it may deem fit to prevent the ends of justice from being defeated. 2. The grounds for this application are on the face of the record. 3. According to the applicant as deponed in his affidavit sworn on 6th June, 2023. 4. That on the 22nd May, 2023 when the matter was coming up for mention to confirm filing of submissions his Counsel informed the court that they did not intend to file submissions and instead requested the court to recall PW2, PW3, PW5 and DW1 for purposes of cross-examination of the witnesses. 5. This application is opposed. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11699/eng@2026-06-24 1
page 1 of 2
6. It is noted that the original file was not called for purposes of certifying correctness, propriety and or illegality of the Lower Court record as required under section 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 7. The application for re-call of the witnesses was after close of prosecution case and the defence and the matter was remaining for submissions. 8. The applicant maintains that his rights to legal representation and fair hearing were breached and denied under Article 25(c) and Article 50(2) (c) of the constitution. 9. This matter had progressed up to conclusion and what was remaining was submissions. To re-open the case would be time consuming and frustrating to the prosecution. There was nothing improper or illegal in the Lower Courts decision not to allow re-opening of the case afresh when it had reached its tail end. There were no stay orders granted by the court. This application has been over taken by events. 10. The application for revision has no merit and it is dismissed. RULING READ AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026. ................ MARTIN M. MUYA JUDGE In the Presence of: Court Assistant – Isaack Molu https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11699/eng@2026-06-24 2
page 2 of 2