Newton Mungala v Inspector-General of Police & 4 others [2013] KEHC 2126 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI

MILIMANI LAW COURTS

CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION

PETITION NO. 276 OF 2013

BETWEEN

NEWTON MUNGALA ………………………...…...................................................................... PETITIONER

AND

THE INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE ...…........................................................................................1^ST RESPONDENT

THE DIRECTOR OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT …………………………………... 2^ND RESPONDENT

DAVID RINGERA …..………………………….......................................................................................... 3^RD RESPONDENT

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION ................................................................................................. 4^TH RESPONDENT

THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL …...……….......................................................................................... 5^TH RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT

This matter has been brought by the petitioner, an advocate, who complains that he is being harassed by the police for acting on behalf of his client’s in a land transaction. 

Both parties concede that the advocate has recorded a statement in the matter and that the matter is still under investigation.  Further, no firm decision has been taken to prefer charges against the petitioner.

Having heard the counsels for the parties, what is apparent is that the petitioner’s complaint essentially is about harassment.  It is to be recognised that the police have the duty to investigate allegations of crime in a manner that respects the dignity of the person and is consistent with the values of the Constitution.  The fact of one being an advocate, on the other hand, does not confer legal immunity from the criminal process.

In the circumstances, the order that commends itself to this court and with the consent of the parties is as follows;

1. The 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th respondents are restrained from demanding from the petitioner (advocate) that he produces, JEFF KIRIGA GICHARU (the vendor) to the investigative arm of government.
2. There shall be no order as to costs.

DATED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 26^th day of September 2013

D.S. MAJANJA

JUDGE

Mr Kabaka instructed by Kabaka and Associates Advocates for the petitioner.

Mr Ng’etich, Litigation Counsel, instructed by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Mr Moimbo, Litigation Counsel, instructed by the State Law Office for the 5^th respondent.