'
The accused person in this matter was granted bail by this court and was unable to raise a bond of Ksh. 500,000/=
On 3 rd March 2025 the defence counsel pleaded with this court to review the figure downwards and this court granted the prayer and ordered the release of the accused on a bond of Ksh. 300,00/= plus a professional undertaking
by one of the accused person’s relative who is an advocate.
The accused person through counsel informed this court on 22/9/2025 that he was unable to find any surety for the Ksh. 300,000/= bond and pleaded with the court for an alternative cash bail.
The prosecution opposed the grant of an alternative of cash bail arguing that the bond as issued by the court was sufficient considering the gravity of the offence charged.
The court has been told by counsel for the accused to consider the fact that, as a show of good faith, one of the accused persons relatives who is an officer of this court, is willing besides depositing any sum with the court, to offer a professional undertaking that the accused, shall not abscond and evade trial.
The predominant purpose of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person and is not meant to punish an accused person. Under Section 123 A of the Criminal Procedure Code the personal circumstances of an accused person are key in determining the amount of bail that one should post with the court.
The right to reasonable bail terms is underpinned in the Judiciary Bail and Bond Policy guidelines. It should be reasonable given the importance of the right to liberty and the presumption of innocence.
The conditions that a court sets should be such that the accused is able to meet and guarantee the attendance of the accused at the trial.
The court must be mindful of the peculiar circumstances of a case in considering an application for bail.
The accused in this matter has been in custody since 2021 yet he is innocent under Article 50 of the Constitution and that presumption must hold till the conclusion of the trial see Cyril Kipruto Serem –Vs- Rep [2020] eKLR .
The accused person has demonstrated that he is a man of limited means and thus this court must be able to review its ruling on Bail noting that an officer of this court is willing to give a professional undertaking in addition to the cash bail that this court may impose.
A counsel’s word is his bond. The advocate concerned knows the position in law regarding those that fail to abide by court orders.
He who gives a professional undertaking is under duty to ensure that the undertaking us honored and any failure to do so can lead to disciplinary action and serious consequences as a practitioner.
The advocate shall be under duty to ensure that the accused attends court as and when required to do.
This court is minded to review the bond of Ksh. 300,000/ and in place therefore substitute it with an order for cash bail for the same sum Ksh 300,000/=n in addition to the professional undertaking in by counsel.
The court emphasizes that the law equally applies to the poor and the rich in society as provided for under Under Article 27 as read with Article 159 of the Constitution.
Justice must be done to all irrespective of their stature in society.
The accused shall thus deposit the sum of Ksh. 300,000 and the relative Ms Maingi who is an advocate shall provide a professional undertaking that the accused will attend court without fail.
The rest of the conditions granted by the court earlier other than the alternative for cash bail shall still apply.
It is so ordered.
'
The accused person in this matter was granted bail by this court and was unable to raise a bond of Ksh. 500,000/=
On 3 rd March 2025 the defence counsel pleaded with this court to review the figure downwards and this court granted the prayer and ordered the release of the accused on a bond of Ksh. 300,00/= plus a professional undertaking
by one of the accused person’s relative who is an advocate.
The accused person through counsel informed this court on 22/9/2025 that he was unable to find any surety for the Ksh. 300,000/= bond and pleaded with the court for an alternative cash bail.
The prosecution opposed the grant of an alternative of cash bail arguing that the bond as issued by the court was sufficient considering the gravity of the offence charged.
The court has been told by counsel for the accused to consider the fact that, as a show of good faith, one of the accused persons relatives who is an officer of this court, is willing besides depositing any sum with the court, to offer a professional undertaking that the accused, shall not abscond and evade trial.
The predominant purpose of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person and is not meant to punish an accused person. Under Section 123 A of the Criminal Procedure Code the personal circumstances of an accused person are key in determining the amount of bail that one should post with the court.
The right to reasonable bail terms is underpinned in the Judiciary Bail and Bond Policy guidelines. It should be reasonable given the importance of the right to liberty and the presumption of innocence.
The conditions that a court sets should be such that the accused is able to meet and guarantee the attendance of the accused at the trial.
The court must be mindful of the peculiar circumstances of a case in considering an application for bail.
The accused in this matter has been in custody since 2021 yet he is innocent under Article 50 of the Constitution and that presumption must hold till the conclusion of the trial see Cyril Kipruto Serem –Vs- Rep [2020] eKLR .
The accused person has demonstrated that he is a man of limited means and thus this court must be able to review its ruling on Bail noting that an officer of this court is willing to give a professional undertaking in addition to the cash bail that this court may impose.
A counsel’s word is his bond. The advocate concerned knows the position in law regarding those that fail to abide by court orders.
He who gives a professional undertaking is under duty to ensure that the undertaking us honored and any failure to do so can lead to disciplinary action and serious consequences as a practitioner.
The advocate shall be under duty to ensure that the accused attends court as and when required to do.
This court is minded to review the bond of Ksh. 300,000/ and in place therefore substitute it with an order for cash bail for the same sum Ksh 300,000/=n in addition to the professional undertaking in by counsel.
The court emphasizes that the law equally applies to the poor and the rich in society as provided for under Under Article 27 as read with Article 159 of the Constitution.
Justice must be done to all irrespective of their stature in society.
The accused shall thus deposit the sum of Ksh. 300,000 and the relative Ms Maingi who is an advocate shall provide a professional undertaking that the accused will attend court without fail.
The rest of the conditions granted by the court earlier other than the alternative for cash bail shall still apply.
It is so ordered.
'