Kirui v Republic (Criminal Application E076 of 2026) [2026] KECA 2099 (KLR) (5 October 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KECA 2099 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAKURU CRIMINAL APPLICATION E076 OF 2026 MB KAIRARIA, JA OCTOBER 5, 2026 BETWEEN BERNARD KIPKEMOI KIRUI .............................................................. APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT (Being an application for extension of time to appeal against conviction and sentence from the High Court of Kenya at Bomet (R .Korir J) delivered on 21st February 2025 in HC.CR.A NO. 7 of 2019) RULING 1. The notice of motion application dated 31st August 2026, seeks extension of time to appeal against conviction and sentence under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022. The application is premised on the grounds set out in the body of the motion supported by the applicant’s adavit sworn on 31st August, 2026 and written submissions dated 30th September, 2026. 2. Bernard Kipkemoi Kirui, the Applicant says that he is aggrieved by and desires to appeal against the judgement delivered on 21st February 2025 [R. Korir J.] in which he was found guilty, convicted and sentenced him to serve 150 years for the oence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code in High Court Cr. Case No. 7 of 2019. 3. However he did not give notice of his intention to appeal and neither did lodge his appeal within the period prescribed by Rules 61. He explains that he formed an immediate intention to appeal immediately after delivery of the judgement and passing of the sentence which he regards as manifestly harsh but he experienced delay in obtaining a copy of the typed judgement and proceedings, while serving his sentence at Naivasha Main Maximum Prison. He was thus unable to lodge his appeal within the statutory period prescribed in the Rules of this Court. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/2099/eng@2026-10-05 1
page 1 of 2
4. He has now approached the Court with this application seeking extension of time to le his notice of appeal and record of appeal out of time. 5. Having considered the grounds of the application, the supporting adavit, the written submissions and cited case law, I am persuaded that the explanation given for the delay is plausible and satisfactory because the Applicant being a convict serving term in prison had no time and opportunity to follow up the typed judgement and proceedings from the High Court. A plausible and satisfactory explanation has been analogized as the key that unlocks the Court’s ow of discretionary favor. Andrew Kiplagat Chemaringo vs. Paul Kipkorir Kibet (2018) eKLR. 6. Accordingly, I nd merit in the application and allow it. I direct that the Applicant shall lodge and serve his notice of appeal within 14 days from the delivery of this ruling and thereafter lodge and serve his memorandum of appeal within 21 days. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU THIS 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026. MURUNGI B. KAIRARIA ………………………… JUDGE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a true copy of the original. Signed. DEPUTY REGISTRAR https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/2099/eng@2026-10-05 2
page 2 of 2