After hearing the parties, the Court of Appeal underscored the following at page 10,11,14,16,18 and 19: "...the issue becomes whether or not the Subordinate Court had jurisdiction to decide those matters during committal proceeding. ...It is common ground that jurisdiction is Court's power to hear and decide a case, and it is a creature of the law. It should be underscored that the jurisdiction of any Court must be expressly given: it cannot be implied and/or assumed. Also note-worth is the point that invariably such jurisdiction is limited. Where a decision of any court may be found to have been reached without jurisdiction, such a decision risks the danger of being declared invalid by a higher Court, (p.10) In our jurisdiction, the Penal Code Cap 16 of the Revised Edition, 2002 is the maior statute prescribing the various offences which the law prohibits and whose breach attracts prosecution. On the other hand, the CPA not only governs the procedure in trials of criminal offences, but also sets out the offences triable bv subordinate courts, and those which are exclusively subject to trial bv the High Court. In all those offences for which the Hioh Court has original jurisdiction, there is a legal requirement for such offences to be instituted in the subordinate courts (the RM's Court and District courts), which are charged with duty to hold committal proceedings, and subseouentlv to commit such accused persons to the Hioh Court fortriai." (pp. 10-11) ..."Even after the repeal of Criminal Procedure Code of 1945. and enactment of the new Criminal Procedure Act. 1985. whose main object was to provide for procedure to be followed in investigation of crimes and conduct of committal trial and for other related purposes, the former position remained the same, thus the active role of the magistrate in committal proceedings was done away with." (p. 14) ... "In that vein, we hold the view that those matters which were raised before the RM's court on 3.9.2014 were leoal matters to which the RM's court had no jurisdiction to decide. Those matters ought to have been reserved with a view of raising them in the High Court upon being committed to that court for trial". ... (P.16) ... "Thus, we are convinced that it was improper for the High Court Judge to interpret those powers as extending to committal proceedings, because as already stated, matters of committal are covered elsewhere. Consequently, we agree with Mr. Ndjike that the Page 25 of 37