Judgment[2021] KEHC 1014
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL REVISION NO E106 OF 2021 ELIUD MWANIKI WAWERU.............................................................................1ST APPLICANT RAFIKI DEPOSIT TAKING MICROFINANCE (K) LTD.............................2ND APPLICANT VERSUS THE DIRECTORATE OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS, KIAMBU....1STRESPONDENT THE NATIONAL POLICE SERVICE............................................................2ND RESPONDENT THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
I therefore find that the application for revision dated 29th July, 2020 is devoid of any merit and is hereby dismissed. The exparte orders granted on 30th July, 2020 staying the lower court proceedings are automatically vacated by the dismissal of the application.
Division and case type: CRIMINAL DIVISIONCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURST Criminal Appeal No 51 of 1986 Macharia …………………….APPELLANTS VERSUS Republic…………….……RESPONDENT JUDGMENT. Stephen Wainaina Macharia, the appellant, was convicted by a Resident Magistrate, Nairobi (Miss A Angawa) of three counts: Viz: 1.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
I make no finding on theactions of Sebastian as his case abated upon his death pendingconclusion of the trial. The case against Mwakalamu KISHUSHU has not been proved beyondreasonable doubt and I find him not guilty.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
I make no finding on theactions of Sebastian as his case abated upon his death pendingconclusion of the trial. The case against Mwakalamu KISHUSHU has not been proved beyondreasonable doubt and I find him not guilty.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Criminal Case 49 of 1995 REPUBLIC…………………....………..………………..PROSECUTOR VERSUS CHARO NZAI KATANA..........................
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OMOLO, LAKHA JJ.A. J.A.) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CRIMINAL CASE NO 638 OF 1992 ABEDINEGO MUTISO MUSYOKI …………..APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC……………………..............……RESPONDENT
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
then ordered that the said occupants be summoned to appear before it to show cause why a closing order should not be made. The affected tenants duly appeared before the Court including an employee of the applicant known as Harrison Mulwa.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS CRIMINAL CASE NO.44 OF 1991 TOM PIEMO OMBURA …………) SHIKUDHANI AJWANG RUMAYA ………………. ACCUSEDS VERSUS REPUBLIC ………………… ………………… ……….
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CRIMINAL (REVISION) CASE NO 25 OF 1990 REPUBLIC…………….………APPLICANT VERSUS MOHAMED…..……………..RESPONDENT (From original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No 496 of 1990 of the Resident Magistrate’s Court at Mombasa, G M Njuguna, Esq, RM) RULING A witness by the name S Pandya was summoned to appear before Resident Magistrate in the above Criminal Case on 14/8/90 to give evidence. According to the record of the court; the witness did not appear
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL CASE NO 54 OF 1988 REPUBLIC…………………………..……….....…..PROSECUTOR VERSUS MOHAMMED SHIRAZ HUSSEN …….…………………ACCUSED
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL CASE NO 54 OF 1988 REPUBLIC…………………………..……….....…..PROSECUTOR VERSUS MOHAMMED SHIRAZ HUSSEN …….…………………ACCUSED
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCriminal Case
tends as a direction to the Court hearing the application for Order of Prohibition to grant the Order without using its own discretion whether it should do so. The Attorney-General did not need any authority, nor a reminder, that in the light of the opinions expressed by the Constitutional Court he could terminate the proceedings even when coupled with a wet hope that he would do so.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI ( Coram:Madan, Potter JJA & Chesoni Ag JA ) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 44 OF 1982 BETWEEN J M...............................................................................................APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC...............................................................................RESPONDENT