Mathe wa Ngara freed on bond

Nancy Kigunzu alias Mathe wa Ngara has been granted a Sh500,000 bond or a Sh1 million cash bail and surety of a similar amount by Makadara High Court Judge James Wakiaga.The judge set aside an earlier ruling by the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) Magistrate Renee Kitangwa thatdenied her bailbut freed her co-accused.Kigunzu charged alongside David Ochieng and Christopher Odipo where the state accused them of trafficking narcotics between August 8 and 9, 2024, at Georgina apartments in Juja, Kiambu County.According to the charge sheet, they allegedly trafficked some 189,300 grams of cannabis valued at Sh5.6 million.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsAppTrial Magistrate Kitangwa denied Kigunzu bail, citing her earlier narcotics case at JKIA and another at the Kahawa Law Courts but admitted her co-accused to Sh1 million bail.“It is my finding that it has been demonstrated that the incident and character of the 1st accused is such that she is likely to commit or abet the commission of other offences or even serious ones,” said Magistrate Kitangwa.Kigunzu appealed the decision at the Kibera High Court but Justice Diana Kavedza transferred the file to the Makadara High Court, where it was placed before Justice Wakiaga.Through her lawyers, Kigunzu argued that the prosecution's grounds for her denial of bailwere mere allegationsthat do not amount to compelling reasons.The lawyers argued that the state had not satisfied their claim through verified documents of a previous record of conviction or absconding.The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

The judge set aside an earlier ruling by the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) Magistrate Renee Kitangwa thatdenied her bailbut freed her co-accused.Kigunzu charged alongside David Ochieng and Christopher Odipo where the state accused them of trafficking narcotics between August 8 and 9, 2024, at Georgina apartments in Juja, Kiambu County.According to the charge sheet, they allegedly trafficked some 189,300 grams of cannabis valued at Sh5.6 million.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsAppTrial Magistrate Kitangwa denied Kigunzu bail, citing her earlier narcotics case at JKIA and another at the Kahawa Law Courts but admitted her co-accused to Sh1 million bail.“It is my finding that it has been demonstrated that the incident and character of the 1st accused is such that she is likely to commit or abet the commission of other offences or even serious ones,” said Magistrate Kitangwa.Kigunzu appealed the decision at the Kibera High Court but Justice Diana Kavedza transferred the file to the Makadara High Court, where it was placed before Justice Wakiaga.Through her lawyers, Kigunzu argued that the prosecution's grounds for her denial of bailwere mere allegationsthat do not amount to compelling reasons.The lawyers argued that the state had not satisfied their claim through verified documents of a previous record of conviction or absconding.The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

Kigunzu charged alongside David Ochieng and Christopher Odipo where the state accused them of trafficking narcotics between August 8 and 9, 2024, at Georgina apartments in Juja, Kiambu County.According to the charge sheet, they allegedly trafficked some 189,300 grams of cannabis valued at Sh5.6 million.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsAppTrial Magistrate Kitangwa denied Kigunzu bail, citing her earlier narcotics case at JKIA and another at the Kahawa Law Courts but admitted her co-accused to Sh1 million bail.“It is my finding that it has been demonstrated that the incident and character of the 1st accused is such that she is likely to commit or abet the commission of other offences or even serious ones,” said Magistrate Kitangwa.Kigunzu appealed the decision at the Kibera High Court but Justice Diana Kavedza transferred the file to the Makadara High Court, where it was placed before Justice Wakiaga.Through her lawyers, Kigunzu argued that the prosecution's grounds for her denial of bailwere mere allegationsthat do not amount to compelling reasons.The lawyers argued that the state had not satisfied their claim through verified documents of a previous record of conviction or absconding.The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

According to the charge sheet, they allegedly trafficked some 189,300 grams of cannabis valued at Sh5.6 million.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsAppTrial Magistrate Kitangwa denied Kigunzu bail, citing her earlier narcotics case at JKIA and another at the Kahawa Law Courts but admitted her co-accused to Sh1 million bail.“It is my finding that it has been demonstrated that the incident and character of the 1st accused is such that she is likely to commit or abet the commission of other offences or even serious ones,” said Magistrate Kitangwa.Kigunzu appealed the decision at the Kibera High Court but Justice Diana Kavedza transferred the file to the Makadara High Court, where it was placed before Justice Wakiaga.Through her lawyers, Kigunzu argued that the prosecution's grounds for her denial of bailwere mere allegationsthat do not amount to compelling reasons.The lawyers argued that the state had not satisfied their claim through verified documents of a previous record of conviction or absconding.The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

Trial Magistrate Kitangwa denied Kigunzu bail, citing her earlier narcotics case at JKIA and another at the Kahawa Law Courts but admitted her co-accused to Sh1 million bail.“It is my finding that it has been demonstrated that the incident and character of the 1st accused is such that she is likely to commit or abet the commission of other offences or even serious ones,” said Magistrate Kitangwa.Kigunzu appealed the decision at the Kibera High Court but Justice Diana Kavedza transferred the file to the Makadara High Court, where it was placed before Justice Wakiaga.Through her lawyers, Kigunzu argued that the prosecution's grounds for her denial of bailwere mere allegationsthat do not amount to compelling reasons.The lawyers argued that the state had not satisfied their claim through verified documents of a previous record of conviction or absconding.The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

“It is my finding that it has been demonstrated that the incident and character of the 1st accused is such that she is likely to commit or abet the commission of other offences or even serious ones,” said Magistrate Kitangwa.Kigunzu appealed the decision at the Kibera High Court but Justice Diana Kavedza transferred the file to the Makadara High Court, where it was placed before Justice Wakiaga.Through her lawyers, Kigunzu argued that the prosecution's grounds for her denial of bailwere mere allegationsthat do not amount to compelling reasons.The lawyers argued that the state had not satisfied their claim through verified documents of a previous record of conviction or absconding.The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

Kigunzu appealed the decision at the Kibera High Court but Justice Diana Kavedza transferred the file to the Makadara High Court, where it was placed before Justice Wakiaga.Through her lawyers, Kigunzu argued that the prosecution's grounds for her denial of bailwere mere allegationsthat do not amount to compelling reasons.The lawyers argued that the state had not satisfied their claim through verified documents of a previous record of conviction or absconding.The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

Through her lawyers, Kigunzu argued that the prosecution's grounds for her denial of bailwere mere allegationsthat do not amount to compelling reasons.The lawyers argued that the state had not satisfied their claim through verified documents of a previous record of conviction or absconding.The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

The lawyers argued that the state had not satisfied their claim through verified documents of a previous record of conviction or absconding.The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

The state argued that the trial court had found that she had been previously convicted of a similar crime and had an ongoing case as well which were compelling enough to deny her bail.Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

Justice Wakiaga ruled that the state had provided no evidence of past convictions or absconding. He noted that bail’s purpose is to secure attendance in court, not restrict rights, and considered her medical condition and consistent court appearances.“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

“During the period of the trail the appellant shall not commit an offence of a similar nature failure of which the bond shall stand revoked without a further order of the trial court,” he said.The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

The judge added: “The appellant shall, during the period of the trail report of the investigating officer herein after every thirty (30) days until the conclusion of the case and or as reviewed by the trial court,” ruled Wakiaga.Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp

Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest developments and special
offers!

Pick your favourite topics below for a tailor made homepage just for you