Alion’go v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E048 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 11885 (KLR) (29 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 11885 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION E048 OF 2026 DR KAVEDZA, J JULY 29, 2026 BETWEEN FREDRICK LUYO ALION’GO .............................................................. APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant moved this Court by a Notice of Motion dated 30 March 2026 seeking, among other orders, that Criminal Case No. E2365 of 2024 be re-allocated from the trial magistrate presently seized of it to another magistrate. 2. The applicant contends that he failed to attend court on 16th February 2026 due to illness, whereupon the trial court issued warrants of arrest. He asserts that despite producing medical documentation and notwithstanding his previous attendance record, the trial court declined to lift the warrants and ordered his detention. He argues that these circumstances justify the transfer of the case to another magistrate. 3. The respondent opposes the application on the ground that the applicant has neither sought nor obtained the recusal of the trial magistrate. It is further submitted that the allocation and re-allocation of cases is an administrative function vested in the Head of Station and not a matter falling within the revisionary jurisdiction of this Court. 4. I have considered the application, the record and the applicable law. Sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code empower the High Court to examine the record of a subordinate court to satisfy itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, and the regularity of the proceedings. Those provisions do not confer jurisdiction upon this Court to direct the administrative re-allocation of a pending criminal case in the absence of a proper legal basis. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11885/eng@2026-07-29 1
page 1 of 2
5. In the present case, the applicant has not demonstrated any bias, impropriety or other exceptional circumstance warranting the transfer of the matter from the trial magistrate. More importantly, no application for the recusal of the trial magistrate was made before the subordinate court. In the absence of such an application and a determination thereon, there is no basis upon which this Court can intervene or direct that the matter be placed before another magistrate. The applicant has therefore invited this Court to exercise a jurisdiction that has neither arisen nor been properly invoked. 6. Accordingly, I find that the application is premature, misconceived and devoid of merit. It is hereby dismissed. Orders accordingly. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 29TH DAY OF JULY 2026 ________________ D. KAVEDZA JUDGE In the presence of: Ms. Cherono for the Applicant Mr. Mutuma for the Respondent Karimi Court Assistant. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11885/eng@2026-07-29 2
page 2 of 2