The owner of popular Club Click on Baricho Road, who killed a patron six years ago following a brawl, has lost a bid for bail.
Jackson Maina was found guilty of manslaughter following the March 2017 incident.
He is serving a five-year jail sentence for the killing of Kelvin Oduor on the night of May 8, 2012.
He had lodged an Appeal and wanted the court to release him on bail or in the alternative, to suspend his sentence and conviction pending hearing and determination of the case.
But Court of Appeal judges Philip Waki, Mohamed Warsame, and Gatembu Kairu rejected his request saying there were no exceptional circumstances to warrant his release from prison.
"The fact that the applicant had been admitted to bail during the trial is a positive consideration but is not exceptional. So is the fear that he will serve the sentence before the appeal is heard, which is unlikely," the judges ruled.
The businessman is said to have led Oduor to the rooftop of the building after a scuffle over theft of a mobile phone before shooting him at close range.
Justice Stella Mutuku, who convicted him, observed that the evidence presented showed that he may not have intended to kill Oduor much as he shot him.
Through his lawyer Timothy Naeku, Maina argued that he had been granted a cash bail of Sh1 million in the trial court and showed he was of good character.
Maina argued that he observed all bail terms throughout his trial for five years until he was sentenced on March 22 , 2017.
He argued that his case has high chances of appeal as the trial court ignored substantial points of law.
The applicant further swore that there were exceptional circumstances to support his plea in that the trial court made exculpatory findings that his intention was to rescue Oduor rather than harm him, and that he shot him in self-defence.
He had also expressed the fear that he would serve the entire sentence before the appeal is heard.
The Director of Public Prosecutions, through Peter Mailanyi, did not oppose the application, but the judges said it was their duty to consider it on its merits under the law.
The judges said they were satisfied that apart from the grounds of appeal being arguable, there is no guarantee of success.
The judges further observed that the DPP, whilst conceding the application, vaguely referred to mistakes made at the trial without identifying any.
"We ignore the concession, as it forms no basis for changing our analysis and understanding of the law as applied to the facts before us," they said.