Case ID:162271

Collins Odhiambo Oluoch v Republic [2020] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Miscellaneous Criminal Application 15 of 2020

Parties:

Collins Odhiambo Oluoch v Republic

Date Delivered:

22 Jul 2020

Case Class:

Criminal

Court:

High Court at Siaya

Case Action:

Ruling

Judge(s):

Roselyne Ekirapa Aburili

Citation:

Collins Odhiambo Oluoch v Republic [2020] eKLR

Case History:

Being an Application for leave to appeal out of time under Section 349 of the Criminal Procedure Code from Original Criminal Case No. 412 of 2015 in the Principal Magistrate’s court at Siaya dated 30.08.2015, Hon. C. Okore

Court Division:

Criminal

County:

Siaya

History Docket No:

Criminal Case 412 of 2015

History Magistrate:

Hon. C. Okore

History County:

Siaya

Disclaimer:

The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA

AT SIAYA

MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 15 OF 2020

COLLINS ODHIAMBO OLUOCH...................................................APPLICANT

VERSUS

REPUBLIC.......................................................................................RESPONDENT

(Being an Application for leave to appeal out of time under Section 349 of the

Criminal Procedure Code

from Original Criminal Case No. 412 of 2015

in the Principal Magistrate’s court at Siaya

dated 30.08.2015, Hon. C. Okore)

RULING

1. The applicant/convict

Collins Odhiambo Oluoch

claims that he was convicted and sentenced by Siaya PM’s court on 30.8.2015 of the offence of attempted defilement contrary to Section 9(1) as read with Section 9(2) of the Sexual Offences Act and sentenced to serve 30 years imprisonment. There is no such offence created under the cited provisions but under section 8(1) as read with section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act.

2. He now claims that he appealed within time but never received any communication. The application does not disclose the name of the trial magistrate. Nonetheless, there is no evidence of an appeal lodged in this court then, which is pending.

3. The applicant/convict is mischievous and dishonest. He is guilty if laches. The application is devoid of merit. It is an afterthought. The same is hereby dismissed.

4. File closed.

Dated, signed and Delivered at Siaya this 22

nd

Day of July, 2020

R.E. ABURILI

JUDGE