REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.449 OF 2000
PATRICK NTHIGA MUVUNGU...........................APPLICANT
Versus
REPUBLIC.........................................................RESPONDENT
PROCEEDINGS
26-9-2000:
Ireri for Applicant
Miss Shiundu, State Counsel
Ireri:
Refer to the affidavit in support. Pray for the stay of the proceedings in the court below. The hearing there is fixed for to-morrow.
The objection to the copies.
Annexture dated 13-7-2000. The applicant never worked at Nyayo house.
The Magistrate did not consider the objection raised by the applicant. Section 68 & 69 of the Evidence Act not complied with.
Miss Shiundu:
Only served yesterday. I am not ready. I do not have the Magistrate’s ruling. I leave it to court.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.449 OF 2000
PATRICT NTHIGA MUVUNGU.................................APPLICANT
Versus
REPUBLIC................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
I have considered the grounds canvassed by the Applicant to stay the proceedings in the Magistrate’s Criminal Case. It would be totally improper to interfer with the Magistrate’s ruling in a matter raised in the application since the trial is pending.
There is nothing to prevent the applicant from challenging any error in the court below after the conviction if any, on appeal against it. The court sitting on such appeal would then decide the ground raised on it either way.
The present application for the stay of the proceedings in the Resident Magistrate’s court is dismissed.
Cited documents 0
Documents citing this one 1
Judgment 1
| 1. | Ramadhan v Rupublic (Criminal Appeal 82 of 2022) [2024] KEHC 4582 (KLR) (6 May 2024) (Judgment) Mentioned |