Esther Chelimo & 2 others v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 12 others [2017] KEMC 1 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE PRINCIPAL MAGISTRATE’S COURT AT  KABARNET

ELECTION  PETITION  NO.  1  OF 2017

ESTHER  CHELIMO...................................................................1^ST  PETITIONER

VERONICA  KIMOI  KIMITEI ......................................................2^ND PETITIONER

MARYLINE  JERONO KOIMA ..................................................3^RD PETITIONER

VERSUS

THE INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND                                                                 

BOUNDARIES COMMISSION.................................................1^ST RESPONDENT

JUBILEE  PARTY......................................................................2^ND RESPONDENT

CHARLES  BOWEN................................................................3^RD RESPONDENT

PURITY  TALLAM...................................................................4^TH RESPONDENT

CHERUTICH  FRANCISCA JEPKUTO..................................5^TH RESPONDENT

SAPHINA  CHELAGAT............................................................6^TH  RESPONDENT

KIPTALA JERUTO.................................................................7^TH  RESPONDENT

KAKEREL EUNICE  CHEPRANYEI.......................................8^TH RESPONDENT

CHERUS  MAUREEN JEPKOSGEI ......................................9^TH RESPONDENT

CAROLINE  CHEBICHII KESSEI.........................................10^TH RESPONDENT

FRANCISCA  JEPSERGON  CHEBURET...........................11^TH RESPONDENT

DIANA  SIRITI.......................................................................12^TH RESPONDENT

KENYA  AFRICAN  NATIONAL  UNION...........................13^TH  RESPONDENT

RULING

I have  had a chance  to peruse  the filed  amended  petition  that is  on record.

I have  no  reason  to refuse  the withdrawal  of the amended  petition  as it was filed  without  leave and out of time.

The respondents  who were  brought  in as number 14-18 were  not served  as there is  no evidence  to that effect  and the advocate  for  the  4-12  petitioner  cannot  purport to be  on record  for the  14-18 respondents  without  notice to that  effect.

I thus  allow  the petitioner  advocates  application  for withdrawal  of the amended  petition  with  no  orders to cost.

The matter  to proceed  as agreed for directions.

S.O. TEMU [PM]

07.10.2017